Drumbeat: October 26, 2011
Posted by Leanan on October 26, 2011 - 10:59am
New Technologies Redraw the World’s Energy Picture
Golda Meir, the former prime minister of Israel, used to tell a joke about how Moses must have made a wrong turn in the desert: “He dragged us 40 years through the desert to bring us to the one place in the Middle East where there was no oil.’ ”As it turns out, Moses may have had it right all along. In the last couple of years, vast amounts of natural gas have been found deep under Israel’s Mediterranean waters, and studies have begun to test the feasibility of extracting synthetic oil from a large kerogen-rich rock field southwest of Jerusalem.
Israel’s swing of fate is just one of many big energy surprises developing as a new generation of unconventional fossil fuels take hold. From the high Arctic waters north of Norway to a shale field in Argentine Patagonia, from the oil sands of western Canada to deepwater oil prospects off the shores of Angola, giant new oil and gas fields are being mined, steamed and drilled with new technologies. Some of the reserves have been known to exist for decades but were inaccessible either economically or technologically.
Energy Experts Say DOE Oil & Gas Forecasts Are Dangerously Misleading
Washington, DC - A group of distinguished energy experts representing academia, industry, think tanks, and non-profit organizations will meet Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 10:30 am in front of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to call for "Truth in Energy"regarding the possibility of a near-term oil crisis and long-term oil shortages. Following the news conference, the group will deliver a letter to DOE Secretary Steven Chu calling for urgent action to address this potentially critical threat to America's economy and national security. The Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas USA (ASPO-USA, www.aspousa.org) organized the news conference.Projections of future oil and gas supply from the DOE's Energy Information Administration (EIA) are misleading, overly optimistic, and foster a dangerous complacency about the nation's energy challenges, according to the group. Such rosy forecasts are typical of industry sources. For example, a recent draft study conducted by the National Petroleum Council (NPC), in cooperation with DOE, claims that development of controversial "shale plays" could make the United States self-sufficient in oil and gas. Petroleum companies with direct interests in shale gas development have played lead roles in the study.
EIA, however, is a taxpayer-funded government agency with a mandate to provide "independent and unbiased… information." Speakers will charge that EIA has failed to fulfill that mission in its oil and gas projections and needs to provide more transparency and explicit explanations about how their forecasts are developed. The group will ask Secretary Chu to answer seven specific questions concerning issues that EIA has failed to critically examine.
Oil Advances a Fourth Day in New York as China Considers Economic Stimulus
Oil traded near its highest in 12 weeks in New York on speculation China’s government will boost the economy of the world’s second-biggest crude consumer, while European leaders prepared to tackle the region’s debt crisis.Prices gained as much as 0.8 percent after China’s industry ministry said it is studying “stimulative policies” for smaller companies. Global oil supplies are “extraordinarily tight,” Goldman Sachs Group Inc. said. European government heads will hold a summit today.
Gasoline prices could slide another 20 cents
NEW YORK — Retail gasoline prices have dropped about 50 cents a gallon since the spring, and motorists could see them slide another 20 cents before the end of the year.The national average, which slipped to $3.446 per gallon on Tuesday, should continue to fall at least through the new year, according to the Energy Information Administration.
Jeff Rubin: Will an oil-driven misery index defeat a U.S. president?
What U.S. presidents seeking re-election fear most is the wrath of a rising misery index. And nothing brings more misery to the world’s largest oil consuming economy than high oil prices.
Hurricane Rina Churns on Toward Mexico’s Yucatan Peninsula
Petroleos Mexicanos, Latin America’s largest oil producer, said port and offshore operations are normal, according to an e- mail sent to Bloomberg News. Kinetic Analysis Corp., which assesses the potential impact of hazards, estimated the storm may shut in 6.51 million barrels a day of oil produced by Pemex.
Kuwait Sets Biggest Gulf Clean-Energy Goal to Free Up Oil
Sun-drenched Kuwait, a desert nation with no solar-power plants and electricity demand that’s growing about 8 percent a year, has set the most ambitious target for using renewable energy in the Gulf region.OPEC’s fifth-biggest oil producer, whose air conditioners run cheaply off state-subsidized oil-fired power plants, aims to generate 10 percent of its electricity from sustainable sources by 2020, said Eyad Ali al-Falah, assistant undersecretary for technical services at the Ministry of Electricity and Water.
Argentina Orders Oil, Gas, Mine Companies to Repatriate All Export Revenue
Argentina ordered oil, gas and mining exporters to repatriate all their export revenue as the government struggles to stem accelerating capital flight in South America’s second-biggest economy.
Cheniere and BG ink $8 bln deal to export US LNG
NEW YORK (Reuters) - BG Group will export liquefied natural gas from the United States under a landmark $8 billion deal with Cheniere Energy that will allow domestic producers to ship bountiful shale gas supplies to the world for the first time.The deal, announced Wednesday, paves the way for terminal developer Cheniere to secure financing for the its Sabine Pass project in Louisiana which could be the first LNG export plant built in the United States in nearly 50 years as U.S. gas production hits record highs.
ConocoPhillips reports 14 pct drop in 3Q profit on lower oil production
NEW YORK — ConocoPhillips says its third-quarter profit fell about 14 percent due to unexpected production losses in China and Libya. Conoco has also been selling assets as it reshapes the company.
Japan's JX plans Nov crude refining down 2 pct y/y
TOKYO (Reuters) - Japan's top oil refiner JX Nippon Oil & Energy Corp plans to refine 5.93 million kilolitres (1.24 million barrels per day) of crude oil in November for domestic consumption, down 2 percent from a year earlier, a company executive said on Wednesday.
China oil refiners lost $289 mln in Jan-Aug - NDRC
(Reuters) - China's oil refining industry lost 1.84 billion yuan ($289 million) from January to August, the National Development and Reform Commission said on Wednesday.With a fall in crude oil prices, refiners' losses narrowed in July and August after widening to the highest level this year in June, the commission said. It did not provide figures for August.
Russia's Lukoil starts drilling in Iraq
MOSCOW (UPI) -- Russia's private oil company Lukoil announced that it started drilling operations in the West Qurna-2 oil field near the Iraqi port city of Basra."We have launched drilling, well borers are already there," company chief Vagit Alekperov was quoted by Russia's state-run news agency RIA Novosti as saying.
IMF: Mideast oil importers face economic slowdown
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) - Middle Eastern countries without significant oil resources face a sharp slowdown in economic growth as the effects of the Arab Spring reverberate across the region, the International Monetary Fund said Wednesday.In a twice-yearly report, the IMF cut its economic growth forecast for the Mideast's oil importing countries - including Egypt and Tunisia - to just 1.9 percent this year. That is down from an earlier IMF forecast of 2.3 percent and well below the more than 4 percent growth in 2010.
Saudi king set to name Prince Nayef as heir
(Reuters) - Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah was expected to name Interior Minister Prince Nayef as his heir on Thursday, formalising a smooth succession in the world's biggest oil producer.Nayef has already run the kingdom on a daily basis for extended periods in recent years, during absences of both King Abdullah and Crown Prince Sultan, the heir who died Saturday.
Poland to speed shale gas if Gazprom keeps price up
(Reuters) - Poland will get an additional incentive to push forward with shale gas projects if Russia's Gazprom refuses to lower multi-year gas prices, Deputy Prime Minister Waldemar Pawlak said on Wednesday.
EU must adopt zero-tolerance approach to tar sands
Tar sands lead to landscape scars, large amounts of energy and water being used and masses of toxic waste.
Nebraska Legislature plans special session on Keystone XL project
Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman has called the Legislature into special session next week to address growing concerns over the proposed Keystone XL pipeline. The pipeline would carry tar sands oil across one of the Midwest's most important aquifers.The action throws a potentially significant new stumbling block into a Canadian company's hope of winning approval before the end of the year for the 1,700-mile pipeline, which would move diluted bitumen -- often heavy in sulfur, nickel and lead -- from Alberta to the Texas coast.
PITTSBORO, NC - A Florida-based natural gas company owner found mistrust and a plethora of questions waiting for him last week at a Chatham County commissioners meeting.
Arctic Village Is Torn by Plan for Oil Drilling
Perhaps more than any other village in the Arctic, Point Hope has a history of uniting against outside forces and, if not prevailing over them, at least outlasting them. Now it is divided. Mr. Tuzroyluk is chairman of the $30 million Tikigaq Corporation here, one of more than 200 native corporations in Alaska authorized by Congress. The corporation, whose shareholders are mostly village residents, supports drilling. Yet the Native Village of Point Hope, whose council is elected by village residents, officially opposed drilling.“Our town,” Mr. Tuzroyluk said, “we’re kind of torn apart between development and sustaining our lifestyle.”
Crime turns oil boomtown into Wild West
WILLISTON, N.D. (CNNMoney) -- As oil companies pump more and more crude out of the ground and workers from around the country arrive to cash in on the black gold rush, a new wave of crime has taken over the once quiet towns of Northwestern North Dakota.Within the last few months, a Watford City pharmacy was robbed of $16,000 in narcotics, four people were stabbed at a local strip club in Williston, a semi truck crashed into an RV full of people sleeping and the first prostitution ring in decades was busted.
Drilling in Fast-Growing Areas Ushers in New Era of Tension
A 90 million-year-old oil bed called the Niobrara — estimated to contain two billion barrels, locked in shale that in past drilling eras was considered too costly to extract — laces down from southeast Wyoming and Nebraska. And like a cowboy with Saturday-night pay in his pocket, ready to spend big and have a good time, the energy industry is riding into town to drill for it.Drilling permits in suburbs, parks and even in lakes have made the local news. Using hydrofracturing technologies — breaking the shale with water, sand and chemicals to release the oil — and horizontal, spiderlike tentacle borers that can spin out beneath communities, the still-emerging boom is bringing energy exploration to some of the fastest-growing counties in the nation, and to places with no experience whatsoever in dealing with it.
EU energy supply at risk after Fukushima -Capgemini
PARIS (Reuters) - European Union governments must encourage investments of as much as 1.1 trillion euros ($1.53 trillion) by 2020 to ensure the bloc's continued energy supply security, French computer consultancy Capgemini said in a study on Wednesday.The impact of Japan's Fukushima nuclear disaster on certain EU states' energy mix has cast doubt on Europe's supply security, the outlook for power prices and efforts to fight global warming, Capgemini energy analyst Colette Lewiner said.
Uranium Deals Prove Most Lucrative as Nuclear Demand Increases: Real M&A
Uranium takeovers are offering investors the biggest potential payoffs, less than a year after the partial meltdown of Japan’s Fukushima nuclear plant.
Trial Starts for Chief of Security at Mine
The former chief of security of a West Virginia coal mine where 29 workers died in an explosion last year went on trial Monday, with prosecutors alleging he had lied to federal agents about safety violations at the mine.The security chief, Hughie Elbert Stover, 60, an employee of a subsidiary of Massey Energy Company, which owned the Upper Big Branch mine, is charged with making false statements to investigators by telling them that the company did not have a policy of giving advance notice of mine inspections to its workers, a practice that violates federal law.
Prosecutors say that Mr. Stover himself trained security guards to use a radio system to tell miners of the presence of inspectors, according to the indictment. Mr. Stover has denied the accusation.
News analysis: Obama takes bipartisan heat on energy policy
WASHINGTON – As his re-election campaign heats up, President Obama finds himself in an awkward position trying to defend his environmental policies against Republicans and disillusioned environmentalists who backed his campaign in 2008.
Solar power is beginning to go mainstream
NEW YORK (AP) — Solar energy may finally get its day in the sun.The high costs that for years made it impractical as a mainstream source of energy are plummeting. Real estate companies are racing to install solar panels on office buildings. Utilities are erecting large solar panel "farms" near big cities and in desolate deserts. And creative financing plans are making solar more realistic than ever for homes.
Future of Solar and Wind Power May Hinge on Federal Aid
IN recent years, wind and solar power have been among the fastest-growing sources of energy in the country.But questions loom over their future: Will federal incentives that are important to their growth continue? And what happens if those incentives expire?
Masdar, the Abu Dhabi company that has trimmed the budget for its flagship development, has found a recipe for making money--showing others how to build green.
In Clean Tech, Venture Capital Looks for Problem-Solvers
In Silicon Valley, where venture capital dollars nurture fledgling technology companies, clean tech is getting a makeover. Many investors are shying away from the high risks and costs of creating new forms of energy. Instead, they are doing what they do best — using software to cope with problems, in this case caused by climate change.
Sports Rally Around Green Projects
AMERICAN sports are often an exercise in excess: fans consume large quantities of beer and hot dogs, stadiums with giant scoreboards and retractable roofs are surrounded by parking lots filled with thousands of cars. In many ways, they represent the broadest cross-section of consumer culture and America’s wasteful ways.But the sports industry — from teams to leagues to stadium and track operators — is becoming more environmentally friendly. In just the last few years, several new arenas have been certified by the United States Green Building Council, and nearly a dozen other facilities have added solar panels. Teams like Seattle and St. Louis have ambitious energy-saving programs at their parks, and the United States Open tennis tournament composts a majority of its waste. Even Nascar, a sport built on gas-guzzling racecars, has introduced a program that includes the recycling of used tires, oily rags and more.
On the Front Lines of the Power Grid
QUICK! You are on duty in a secret control room in a nondescript, windowless building. The sign out front is so small that people driving by cannot read it, and it may give no clue what goes on inside, anyway. But your task is crucial: you are matching the ever-changing power needs of tens of millions of electricity customers with supply coming from hundreds of electricity generators, deciding which units will run and which ones will be idle, and making quick adjustments for the generators you can’t schedule, like the wind machines and solar panels.Hardly anybody will ever know you are here, unless you mess up.
Occupy Christchurch – What’s going on?
What concerns these people cannot be simply characterised as rampant capitalism as has been claimed. It is the interlocking nature of six current crises that they are bringing attention to.
5 Ways the World Will Change Radically This Century
A panel of academics met at Columbia University's Earth Institute on Monday (Oct. 17) to discuss the impacts of the human population explosion, including the ways in which it will change the face of the Earth this century. Here are five striking changes you — or your kids or grandkids — can expect to see.
Endless population, shrinking resources
The situation with oil is different as various experts believe the maximum rate of global petroleum extraction will be reached by 2030, after which the rate of production will enter terminal decline.Steinbach believes peak oil is a huge challenge facing the Earth, especially when considering the exploration for new reserves and the development of new technologies.
With 7 Billion People, World Has a Poop Problem
Investing in sanitation is by any measure a winning bet: According to the U.N., for every dollar invested in sanitation, $8 are returned in reduced public health costs and lost productivity due to disease. According to WaterAid, a $30 donation buys one person access to both clean water and sanitation.The availability of a toilet can have wide-ranging effects, George said. In developing areas, she said, up to 20 percent of girls drop out of school, because they have no place to relieve themselves. Providing a latrine can mean the difference between illiteracy and education.
China's one-child rule turns into a time bomb
China's one-child policy has prevented almost half a billion births but has turned into a demographic time bomb as the population ages, storing up huge economic and social problems for the country.
Despite his online moniker, High Hopes doesn't have much hope at all for the world's resources, particularly oil.He subscribes to the Peak Oil theory, espoused by observers in and out of the oil business, that claims the world's oil supply is approaching its zenith, that production is on a decline or at least is unable to keep pace with consumption.
"We're not going to run out, but we'll blaze through it very fast, overusing it faster than we can pump it," he said.
The Third Industrial Revolution — an interview with Jeremy Rifkin
What was the real cause of the Great Recession? More importantly, in a country accustomed to robust rebounds from burst bubbles, why is our economy stuck in neutral?In his latest book, The Third Industrial Revolution, economist and author Jeremy Rifkin argues that the crash of the US housing market was not the proximate cause of the Great Recession, but was instead an aftershock of crude oil hitting a price of $147 per barrel oil in July 2008 – 60 days prior to the crash of the financial markets.
What Peak Oil Means For Our Economy
“There is simply no question that the risks here are beyond anything that any of us have ever dealt with.” These are the words of Robert Hirsch in the Hirsch Report,no commissioned by the United Stated Department of Energy, in 2004, to examine the effects and implications of peak oil on society and the economy.The Economic and social implications of peak fossil fuels will force us to re define our economic system and it will become necessary to re – assess our pre conceived notions of what is economically and socially possible. In effect it will lead to a forced localisation of our economic activities, which will undoubtedly bring certain difficulties and hardships in the short run, however, if communities respond in a collaborative way to these new realities they can put in place the necessary mitigations to help build more sustainable and resilient communities which will stand the test of time. The alternative is simply frightening.
Outside Cleveland, Snapshots of Poverty’s Surge in the Suburbs
“The growth has been stunning,” said Elizabeth Kneebone, a senior researcher at the Brookings Institution, who conducted the analysis of census data. “For the first time, more than half of the metropolitan poor live in suburban areas.”As a result, suburban municipalities — once concerned with policing, putting out fires and repairing roads — are confronting a new set of issues, namely how to help poor residents without the array of social programs that cities have, and how to get those residents to services without public transportation. Many suburbs are facing these challenges with the tightest budgets in years.
China Takes a Loss to Get Ahead in the Business of Fresh Water
TIANJIN, China — Towering over the Bohai Sea shoreline on this city’s outskirts, the Beijiang Power and Desalination Plant is a 26-billion-renminbi technical marvel: an ultrahigh-temperature, coal-fired generator with state-of-the-art pollution controls, mated to advanced Israeli equipment that uses its leftover heat to distill seawater into fresh water.There is but one wrinkle in the $4 billion plant: The desalted water costs twice as much to produce as it sells for. Nevertheless, the owner of the complex, a government-run conglomerate called S.D.I.C., is moving to quadruple the plant’s desalinating capacity, making it China’s largest.
“Someone has to lose money,” Guo Qigang, the plant’s general manager, said in a recent interview. “We’re a state-owned corporation, and it’s our social responsibility.”
EU to resist US pressure on airline emissions
BRUSSELS — The European Union insisted Tuesday it will enforce a new law that imposes an emissions cap-and-trade program on airlines flying to and from Europe, despite angry opposition from the U.S. Congress.
Climate-change skeptic turns skeptical about the skeptics
Muller, who has been an avowed skeptic of climate change and global warming arguments, set out to prove the data wrong. Instead, he has published an essay in The Wall Street Journal that pulls no punches about its findings.“Global warming is real,” Muller wrote in his column for the WSJ discussing his findings. “Perhaps our results will help cool this portion of the climate debate. How much of the warming is due to humans and what will be the likely effects? We made no independent assessment of that.”
Delhi faces high risk from global warming - study
SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Rapidly growing megacities in Africa and Asia face the highest risks from rising sea levels, floods and other climate change impacts, says a global survey aimed at guiding city planners and investors.The study by risk analysis and mapping firm Maplecroft, released on Wednesday, comes as the United Nations says the world's population will hit seven billion next week and as huge floods inundate areas of Thailand and the capital Bangkok.
FACTBOX - Global climate change risk rating
REUTERS – Countries and megacities in Africa and Asia are among the most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change over the coming years, a global survey shows, underscoring the risks from floods, rising sea levels, droughts and storms.With populations in many developing nations growing quickly, particularly in megacities with 10 million or more people, already creaking infrastruture could be overwhelmed by an increase in deadly disasters.
Combining data gathered on the ground with microwave satellite recordings and the output from a model of the ice sheet, he and graduate student Patrick Alexander found a near-record loss of snow and ice this year. The extensive melting continued even without last year's record highs.
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.
Nothing like a cliff-hanger...
The deadline Europe cannot afford to miss
Meanwhile, market indicators are up so far today. Maybe the money changers haven't been spooked? Then again, maybe they are hedging their bets?
"Meanwhile, market indicators are up so far today."
Update: Stocks Rise on Euro Optimism, Durable Goods
As Round Tripper says below, Greece has probably been long factored into the mix. And whether bear or bull, up or down, the predators will feed from it.
Update 2: U.S. Stocks Erase Gains on Euro Summit Concern
Why you should be worried about Europe
Edited version of testimony delivered Tuesday before the House Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade.
I'd say 50/50
Yep, 50/50 and I'll add, that's if they do muddle through and come up with some kind of joint action plan today.
Europe's problem is systemic. It's neither fish or fowl. It's not a federation with a central authority that can act on behalf of the whole like the United States, Brazil, Canada, or Australia. Nor is it a group of independent sovereign countries acting in concert. It is a treaty bound monetary and trading union with no transnational institution capable of imposing universal credit or fiscal controls, despite the fact most of its members operate under a common currency.
Such ambiguity is hamstringing participating governments from acting in ways to ease the credit/trade difficulties facing their own respective domestic populations.
Europe is at a crossroads: integration or fragmentation. Each option is fraught with its own set of dangers. To do nothing is worse.
In many respects Europe is in better shape than the United States:
1. Europe's energy use is much lower than that of the United States.
2. Europe doesn't have the massive gap between the top and the bottom as the United States (and the gap is rapidly increasing in the U.S.)
3. With the exception of Greece, European countries are running budget deficits much lower than the United States.
4. Europeans don't believe in maintaining a massive worldwide military empire like the United States.
5. Europe provides reasonable healthcare for its entire population for much less cost than the United States--and the U.S. excludes a significant number of people from coverage.
6. While the European political culture is mixed, I think there are a reasonable number of serious politicians there--unlike the U.S. where virtually all of them above the state/local level are corrupt (owned by banksters and other special interests), believe in mortgaging future generations...
A fair and accurate statement in all but one area, politically. This is a political crisis more so than a financial one.
Politically, Europe has to coordinate action among multiple partners. The EU is heavy on the bureaucratic and legal definitions of itself, a lightweight on the actual authority to take concrete action to remedy fiscal problems. Solve the political problem, Europe might have a chance to come out ahead. Until then, expect chaos.
Read the facts and forget about the opinion, that's what I have learned about MSM. No one knows why US Stocks erased gains.
To give an example three months back the headline was, Gold making strong gains as safe haven on the back of Eurozone crisis two months later when Gold fell by 10% in two weeks the headline was Gold drops on concerns arising out of Eurozone crisis
I was like Huh.
I think the markets have pretty much factored in Greece. When the default, whatever form it takes, happens, it won't take anyone by surprise. Greece is to Bear Stearns as Italy is to Lehman Bros.
Latest news in: European Union reaches key agreement on Greek debt.
And, EFSF Bailout Fund Will Be Worth $1.4 Trillion: Sarkozy
Hair cuts and happy hours are sure expensive these days. Hopefully, Angela Merkel won't have to go to the Bundestag any time soon for another cash advance. Germany has made up in one day for any outstanding reparations left over from the war. If I was German, I'd be pushing for something in return - like a much bigger say in the workings of the EU. "He who pays the piper calls the tune."
I'm sure Germany is asking for Something, but your suggestion would still be taken by many as going right from reparations into preparations.
"French President Nicolas Sarkozy estimates the euro region’s bailout fund will be worth $1.4 trillion after European governments agreed on steps to leverage existing guarantees by as much as five times."
This is INSANE!!!
Even if the EU can get a common agreement on exactly how this roughly 5 to 1 leverage will be done they would be another trillion or so in debt to someone some where!
The banks will love it because not only will someone get commissions on selling bonds in the direct and after market but they
will be able to make 100s of billions of dollars in commissions by generating 10 to 20 trillion dollars in various types of derivatives
(CDS, Interest rate swaps, currency swaps and any sort of combination there in). This would leave around 1 trillion worth of "uncovered"
swaps because of the musical chairs nature of them.
The EU will keep changing the rules when the "2013" requirements can't be met. This will end when some sovereign nations people rise up say "no more" as Iceland. At that point everything will became "unwound" as the "uncovered" counter parties can'i pay off (think AIG!).
So much for my rant!!
DAD
DAD, don't you know, the politicians have it all under control. The remedy is simple. The solution to debt is always more debt.
Like you, I suspect the current deal is more of the same smoke and mirrors. But it keeps the systems going for another few months (weeks? days?) until the Emperor flashes the crowd again and is seen as wearing no clothes.
The banks get to keep fleecing the customer. The derivative bonanza carries on. The politicians get short term kudos for their next election campaigns. The people get squeezed by arbitrary austerity decisions from on high. The stairway to heaven is paved by the German taxpayer. BAU.
Is this INSANE? Sure is, particularly if the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. There is, however, a dearth of ideas, and so perpetuating the ride is seen as the only logical, viable option. What else can be done?
As Scarlet O'Hara said amid the ruins of Tara, "Tomorrow, I'll think about it tomorrow."
Got to say, I think the end result of this can't be closer union - people should be realising that 'closer union' is the cause of this problem.
What we need to see is the end of the euro as anything but a third intermediary currency. Then countries can adapt to changing circumstances and things will go better.
There was never a good reason for the euro, and everything leading up to it was fudged. Call it a day on it and europe would be in a better position.
Politics is never a good reason for.....anything.
not this same old cliff hanger again ?
end game is a fully inter grated united states of Europe or is that the Franco/German Empire - as the Germans and French seem to be running the show these days.
this economist seems to see the issues different from the BBC
http://www.mindfulmoney.co.uk/wp/shaun-richards/the-thoughts-of-kyliesea...
one of the other web pages I follow.
Forbin
I can think of worse fates for Europe if the first half of the 20th century is anything to go by.
First Bakken Oil Rail Shipment to East Coast
I was told by my contact at the Surface Transportation Board that the first CP unit train with Bakken oil had reached Albany. There it will be loaded on barges and shipped to a Philadelphia area refinery.
An all rail movement would have involved splitting revenue with CSX (maybe N-S) and they would have wanted the transfer in Chicago (or charged as much as they would have gotten from Chicago).
CP's marketing for Bakken Oil does not mention this new service.
http://www.cpr.ca/en/ship-with-cp/where-you-can-ship/bakken-shale/Pages/...
The WTI-Brent spread should shrink.
Best Hopes for Working Things Out,
Alan
The WTI-Brent spread should shrink.
That sounds like pretty big news. Not good in an election year to have WTI price dam break.
A little unplanned Rail road maintenance needed /sarcasm>
Another option is taking Bakken Oil by rail to Eastern Canada refineries to replace imported oil (these refineries are not set up for Alberta tar).
Who needs the Keystone pipeline extension ?
Alan
One tanker car holds around 250-300 barrels of oil. A complete long train of say 200 tanker cars would only be about 50,000 barrels of oil, and this takes what, 10 days to move from North Dakota to New York as a guess? New pipelines being proposed to deal with glut of crude in midwest are in the several hundred thousand barrels per day of capacity range, and storage at Cushing is over 40 million barrels of oil -- just moving out 10% of the extra oil right now at Cushing would take around 15,000 rail car loads.
I doubt that there are enough available tanker cars in the US for a midwest to east coast rail connection to make any impact on the current WTI spread, but if you have contract on the tanker cars & access to the rail line capacity, great margin business moving WTI to (any of) the coasts.
WTI/Brent should shrink eventually, but it's going to take finishing at least one of the pipeline options (e.g. a pipeline reversal back to the Gulf Coast) to move sufficient volume to do it.
China imported over 1 million b/day from Russia for over a decade - despite the change in gauge.
Large gangs of Chinese would come out, jack up the tank cars, slide the wheels on the axle and drop them. Coming in full and out empty.
Tank car building capacity in the USA jumped to accommodate ethanol (which cannot be easily pipelined). 10% of gasoline burned by volume (ethanol) goes by rail and some barge. Adding more train cars for 500,000 to 1 million b/day is doable in a few years.
57,000 barrels/train, ten trains/day per track, can be easily accommodated (on CN from Chicago to New Orleans today) in most cases. Double track and room for 50+ trains/day is added.
Double tracking increases transit speed which will then reduce the number of tank cars & locos required.
Best Hopes,
Alan
Rail tank cars have a capacity of 34,500 usg or 821 barrels. Actual volumetric capacity may be less, because of gross weight restrictions.
An 18 wheel truck transport can haul 200 barrels.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_capacity_of_a_Railroad_Tank_Car
"Energy experts demand "Truth in Energy" from Energy Secretary Steven Chu"
Best hopes for a well-televised arrest; there is no better publicity.
Good luck, y'all.
Mike
Jan Mueller, with ASPO-USA, reports that the news conference went very well. Unfortunately, because of a last minute business conflict, I couldn't make the news conference, but I will be in D.C. next week for the full ASPO-USA conference:
http://www.aspousa.org/conference/2011/
See you there.
Oil’s Hottest Race From Kenya to Greenland Spurs Record Quest
Example of price needed for marginal barrel anyone?
In respect to the NYT's piece linked above:
When I was a young guy still in school, and for a long time afterward, I believed in the technological tooth fairy's omnipitence, and in the classical ecomnomists beliefs in respect to always finding ways to work around a resource availability problem.
But I also believed in ultimate physical limits of the sort often mentioned in chemistry and biology classes-which at Tech were taught in the same classrooms by the same instructors to ag guys exactly as they were taught to chemistry and biology majors sitting all around me at the same hour.It was embarrassing hearing about some of the excesses practiced even back then by large scale farm operators;the freshman biology prof would turn red and sputter when ever the topic of lacing animal feeds with antibiotics came up.
Of course the ag guys a few buildings over not only stoutly defended such practices-they actually endorsed them as the wave of the future and the route to financial success.
Of course it took a certain amount of rationalizing to manage this intellectual discrepancy.I managed by presuming that the cornucopian side would win the race against potential collapse, and that the entire world would eventually be prosperous, even in the face of decling resources-that old techno fairy was whispering in my ear of course that everything would be fine in the end.
Now the most interesting aspect, from a communications standpoint, is that I recognize in myself a strong tendency to believe whatever I hear often, if the message is rational, coherent, logically consistent, has some persausive evidence included, and so forth;but ABOVE ALL,to believe the message it must NOT BE CONTRADICTED by an opposing message possessed of the same qualities.
People who read the NYT , which is truly a fine newspaper, as newspapers go these days, but nevertheless woefully inadequate in terms of presenting the raw evidence in an impartial manner in respect to alm ost any subject important to thge corporate world, ARE SIMPLY GOING TO BELIEVE THE NYT.
I used to read it almost every day myself when I had more time.
But like the larger part of the audience here, I am capable of thinking for myself-most of the time at least.Nowadays I find the arguments of the biologists far more compelling than those of the technocopians , not excluding those who dominate my own professional field.
I am certain the technocopians are going to lose the race, that the collapse of bau is inevitable, and that it will come within the next couple of decades at the latest.
Now only a relatively few people ever change their mind in such a radical way as I have, which involves giving up many and diverse cherished values and assumptions.
There is still some small but realistic chance that the worst aspects of collapse can be averted if people such as the members of this forum will adopt the well established and proven rules of communicating with a hostile audience.
We can either build bridges, or burn them, as we choose, personally, one at a time, when we post a comment, or when we engage in casual conversation with coworkers, friends, and family.
Unfortunately, most of us here would have died without ever getting a date if we had been as clumsy at communicating with the opposite sex as we are at communicating with those who believe differently about the environnment and resources.
Instead of mocking someone as ignorant who says there are let us say, five billion barrels of oil off the coast of the carolinsa, it might be better to remark that thank god, that is enough to last us six months or so, and acting truly grateful about the prospect of it being there for us when we really really need it.
That little " six month supply" weed can grow into a major problem in a cornucopians fantasy energy garden, if he has a brain any bigger than a hummingbirds, and you plant it skillfully.
He may actually go so far as to check out current monthly consumption, etc, and do a little napkin math over his nachos and beer next time he is watching football with his buddies.If he comes back and says it will last a year,the stage is set for a fast discussion of actual likely recovery rates and likely time frames at that point.
OFM, thanks for commenting in depth on this article, and saying more articulately than I could, much of what I was thinking. In adition, no where in the article -- not once -- does it talk about the price at which these new "miracle barrels" of oil will need to be sold.
As Darwinian has pointed out numerous times, we'll never see $200/barrel oil, at least in any semblance of the present economic set-up. It only took oil prices in the $120s - $130s to whack the economy upside the head and send us into a deep recession that helped drive down oil prices.
We can produce all the keragen and shale oil we want, but if we can't afford it at the height of a new recession, what happens to all the investment needed to sustain that kind of production? POOF, I suspect.
The thing is for males/females is that the opposite sex wants to institutionally get in each others pants. We're just as clumsy convincing in dating/relationships but the deck is stacked in our favour.
Unfortunately there is no real instinctual bias towards even attempting to understand something like peak energy. People simply are not programmed to respond with anything aside from indifference to the idea that some abstract concept is a problem, especially when their peers aren't thinking the same. I think there is something different about the people on this forum, perhaps we're more socially awkward because we think for ourselves. We probably tend to use our slow brains a hell of a lot more effectively than the general public (system 2).
People in general tend to believe what they're told to believe. If they're told that one child per person is a good idea then they'll say it is a good idea. If people are told that X people are evil and Y people trying to stop them are good then generally they'll believe that. I believe that the body has various mechanisms which save the human mind from itself. The whole reason why people cry is to get rid of stress hormones after a bad event has passed. Telling people that something abstract and stressful is an uphill struggle because most people actively reject it, you have to make an excellent case and even that is likely to fail to convince most people.
I don't think people are very good at all of taking personal responsibility for themselves and the consequences of their actions. It is easier to say "Rockman, stop drilling up so much damn oil, it's ruining the planet" Than "Squilliam, you need to think about the consequences and long term liabilities of your lifestyle". I can make up as much rhetoric as I want about how people like Exon Mobil, 1% etc are bad people but the unanswered question I have never seen even tabled in any real discussion is people whom are 24+ whom are protesting saying "what did I do to cause the current BAU situation?". When people are sleepwalking through life seeking one carnal pleasure after the next then can they turn around and complain when people who were more focused seize political and economic power for themselves? Is it really a bad thing that people whom took the time and effort to organize things get it their own way?
We can't get people to (in the short term):
-> Not be fat.
-> Not drink/smoke.
-> Not get in debt for consumer crap.
-> Change his/her personal habits.
-> Think about making real adjustments for climate change.
We can get people to
-> Go out with us
-> Have sex with us
-> Marry us
-> Divorce us
-> Take half our money
Great point, but I would buy it even more if you included the role of deception (eg., political leaders saying one thing - doing another) in disenfranchising the working class . In the instance of United States politics, talk with almost any 'Obama 2008' voter (me included) for clarification. As well, lets not forget complicity of the news media more concerned with ratings than providing information that we can use to actually make informed decisions.
While we're on the topic of relationships, the deck tends only to be stacked in our favor if you're normally socialized, a large unconscious component of which I believe is trust in BAU. The dating game is relatively straightforward if you like going to drink, having a good time socializing through intellectually empty conversation, driving a lot to meet with the people you're going to drink and socialize with, buying the latest gadgets and clothes to fit in with those people, etc.
OTOH if you become the pariah by advocating the idea of limits, reducing consumption of resources, and increasing the intellectual discourse, then it's not so straightforward. But screw it. I'd rather spend the hard effort inviting others to see the futility of continuing BAU, than join comfortably with the rest.
I do agree with oldfarmer's advice to let people in on the secret slowly and reasonably. This I have practiced for about 6 months now, with interesting results that are gender-specific:
Many male peers are adamant about rejecting the idea of limits, and simply put out the "invisible hand of the market" in defense: they cannot accept anything but BAU. However, I have been able to convert some and now have a circle of friends who all understand that BAU is over. I have periodic intellectual discussions with them regarding possible solutions, how to structure our careers with this in mind, etc.
Many female peers can initially see the sense in considering limits and considering scenarios other than BAU, but only a couple have I ever been able to follow up with intellectually. The rest are straight up disinterested after the first time I bring it up. In these cases I find after catching up with them that they are happy with BAU practices.
Keep in mind these peers are from diverse academic backgrounds (global health, economics, art, psychology, and engineering). I haven't yet detected a difference in response to these abstract global issues that is dependent on their academic major.
Assuming my communication with the opposite sex is not horribly awkward (which I don't think it is, honest!), thoughts? Stories? Since you and I are approx. in the same generation I'm particularly interested in hearing from you what your experiences have been.
The math of 500k a day costs travelling 9k miles is probably all one needs to know to realise how marginal the situation has gotten. Like a car engine pushed to the edge of the tachometer red line, the world economy cannot take it for very much longer before oil triple digit cost starvation shuts the system down.
That is what happens too - if a car is redlined, not enough oil gets to the moving parts and it seizes up. Mechanics call it oil starvation. And we are now running so hard, so fast trying to keep up with a system pincering in on the limits of what is viable.
Part of that scenario is borrowing. The EU now wants to go all in on a plan to once and for all solve their debt problems. But all it will do is get a little more oil to the moving parts for a little longer, then chuga, chuga, poofth, caput.
PV Systems Have Gotten Dirt Cheap
Guest post in Green Building Advisor highlights the rapid reduction in the cost of PV panels! Combine PV with houses that are built to the Passive House standard and you end up with net zero (positive) energy homes.
Comments are worth reading if you are interested in energy efficient building.
Andrew
Yeah, I've posted it a few times, but I'm shocked how cheap the panels have become. Most of the money is in the installation these days. If we can streamline the permitting and inspection process, solar will really become widespread.
I don't envy the power companies that are going to start having to deal with less stable grids once the number of PV systems starts becoming high. But I suspect Germany has learned how to deal with it and can give us advice.
Its partly better production, but its also oversupply driving sales prices below the cost of production. Typical Chinese manufacturing costs are $1.10-$1.50 per watt, but they are selling for just over a dollar. Even First Solar with their $.75/watt thinfilm cells, is worried. They fired their CEO yesterday, and their stocj just got hammered.
We really got to get the installation cost down quickly so we can take advantage of the glut of panels. And hopefully save some of the better manufacturers!
There is now a lawsuit against the Chinese, on the basis that they are "Dumping" panels here.
SolarWorld Files Complaint Against Chinese Panelmakers and Cell Manufacturers
How much are installation costs? I read somewhere that they range between $1 and $1.50 per watt.
I've been hearing numbers more like $3.50 total for utility scale projects. Take $1.50 (could be less) for the panels, and that leaves $2plus. Now $.50 to $1 of that might be paperwork/inspections etc. that hopefully will be dealt with. We still need quite a bit of reduction to occur in the phsyical installation cost.
Re: China's one-child rule turns into a time bomb from DB
see also The Unstable Future of a World Full of Men
S - Back in 2000 when I adopted my daughter in China there was an estimated 60 to 80 million men who would never get married for lack of women. The Chinese even had a slang term for them: translated "barren branches". The lonely country boys were prime recruits for the military. So it became "3 hots and a cot. And a date" Maybe.
Hey, Rockman, I didn't know we had that in common! I adopted one daughter from China in 2004 and another in 2006.
Preacher - Yep..one of the happiest days of my life. She's from Juijang in central China. Such an odd contrast: perfect little China doll face with a S Texas red neck twang. At 12 yo like many of the girls she doesn't care to talk about China. As suspect by middle age that attitude might change.
I think many folks can't imagine the demand for economic growth in China. One vivid memory in a mall big box store: literally one or more sales girls every 10'. I could stand in one spot and see at least 30 of them. So much energy and demand for jobs. IMHO China had no choice but to push hard. The future may not be sustainable but their current situation wasn't either.
I wonder what the pressure for jobs would have been like if China had not instigated the one child policy. Like Bangladesh waiting to collapse maybe. I personally think that once it got going it has been the greatest contribution too Chinese economic growth. You usually need twice the economic growth of the population just to stand still. 2% population growth 4% economic growth and you are running on the spot.
Re: With 7 Billion People, World Has a Poop Problem
I went to a talk by a professor in a Global Health class who had done work in the developing world with water/sanitation for 30 years. She concluded that it's impossible as it is to develop enough flush toilets for reasonable access for every person in the developing world, because of emerging water scarcity. Peak water, peak sanitation?
Water toilets in an age of peak phosphorous are a short cut to starvation.
We (as a species ) will need to move back to composting toilets for their fertiliser content.
This is already happening among to a small extent in the UK, but there is a huge hill to climb in terms of social
acceptability as well as physical practicalities of keeping disease at bay.
We need to close the nutrient cycle if we are ever to be a sustainable civilisation.
I like Joseph Jenkin's Humanure tech. It's very simple, cheap and only requires access to biomass which is doable anywhere except desert areas. WaterAid's use of pit toilets to me would be stinky little hell boxes.
There may be a potential problem with even that; hormones and drugs. The combination of unnatural chemicals ingested by such a large portion of the population may end up concentrating in any composted waste. I suspect that we already have a problem with both natural and synthetic estrogen washing over the world.
You'd be amazed at what a well run compost pile will break down. Between the high temperatures and biological activity, I wouldn't expect the hormones or drugs to last very long. Even small amounts of plastic get broken down.
Since there may not be peak poop for a while yet, we're doing our part at my school:
http://www.snre.umich.edu/newsroom/2006-06-09/ok-does-anybody-have-to-us...
http://www.snre.umich.edu/greendana/today
http://www.snre.umich.edu/ties/overview
Nextdoor launches neighborhood social networks
We've had something like this in Vermont for a while now. Front Porch Forum (http://frontporchforum.com/) was started by a family in Burlington. My wife and I have been a member for about 5 years now.
The site owners recruited their first members with flyers that they handed out in person. It's a nice way to distribute thoughts and ideas to your neighbors. Most participants act int he spirit of the forum and keep things friendly (there's very like talk of religion or politics - occasionally there's information from a local meeting and some politicians will occasional post a short introduction, but I haven't witnessed any significant proselytizing).
With that said... I find it much nicer, and more informative, to walk around our neighborhood with my kids while they're riding their bikes and talk to the neighbors.
For some reason, this well meaning program sends a shiver through me.
It reminds me of Phoenix, where neighbors are identified by the car they drive )the black Lexus SUV, the red mini-van, etc.)
Alan
Reminds me of the cartoon with the Public Restroom Door and a sign,
"Sorry, Restroom out of order, but please come visit us at PUBLIC_RESTROOM.COM !!"
The Next Door approach of displaying a map with the neighbors homes highlighted is certainly a little creepy. The forum that I described above is more of a list serve. People sign up if they're interested. There is no integration with google maps except to show the boundaries for neighborhoods (the forum is split into neighborhoods to keep the groups small).
They should have googled around before choosing that .com the .org is a bit of a contrast.
NAOM
It's interesting to compare a USAToday news article on the Occupy Protests with a similar article by Al Jazeera. I suppose that one can assume that the facts that they agree on are somewhat correct.
USAToday (associated press)
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2011-10-26/occupy-wall-street-...
Al Jazeera
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2011-10-26/occupy-wall-street-...
Looking around twitter you can find all sorts of links to pictures and videos
Warning: video is just a snippet of raw footage, and it's kind of upsetting if you don't like seeing injuries.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMUgPTCgwcQ&feature=youtu.be
To me the tone looks more like the Greek protests than the Vancouver hockey riot or the Tottenham riot. I wonder what might happen if the economic situation in the US continues to worsen, its not like the OAS (Organization of American States) will be bailing anybody out.
Oakland Police Suppress Protesters With the Same Technology as Dictators
and Oakland Police Department Crowd Management/Crowd Control Policy
Oakland Police Critically Injure Iraq War Vet During Occupy March
After an Oakland officer killed a person laying face down at a Bart station a few years ago, then got a tiny sentence only to later be reduced to an even tinier sentence, they now kill a war vet at a peaceful protest?
Earl,
My comment here isn't directed at you. It just seemed like a good place to put it.
Please send Marine Scott Olsen, an Occupy Oakland police brutality victim, a get well card.
24-year-old Iraqi war veteran Scott Olsen collapsed after Oakland police fired a tear gas canister and he was hit in the head. Fellow protesters rushed to help and police lobbed a flash grenade right next to Olsen's fractured skull. Olsen's condition was downgraded today to fair. Olsen joined the U.S. Marines in 2006, served two tours in Iraq, and was discharged in 2010.
The address is:
U.S.M.C. Scott Olsen
Highland Hospital
1411 E. 31st Street
Oakland, CA 94602
Here is more video of the same incident. As the protestors move in to aid the wounded man, an Oakland PD officer tosses a flash bang (or sting ball?) grenade right into the middle of them. Nice PR work Oakland! He's probably a Raiders fan :-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZLyUK0t0vQ
Expect the police to send take down notices and demands for identification to Google.
NAOM
Oakland PD is quoted in multiple news outlets as not having used flash bangs. It may have been an officer from a different police agency but clearly someone threw that grenade from the cops side. In the video you can see two other camera persons who had a clear view of the entire incident. I'd love to see their video. Methinks the Oakland PD public affairs department is going to be busy trying to explain this fiasco.
Not a peep about the riots on CNN all day. They are too busy covering breaking news about the discovery of Blackbeard's 500 year old cannon.
I mentioned this yesterday on related news of the previous Drumbeat, but it seems that the more I read to myself what I had posted, that what I had posted was more insightful then I originally thought:
flash - It seems the relationship between middle income growth and FF prices/availability relates directly to business growth. Folks tend to go on about how concentrated wealth is in this country. But there are about 8.3 million businesses in this country: 35,000 with more than 1,000 employees, 250,000 with 100 to 1,000 employees and 8 MILLION WITH LESS THAN 100 EMPLOYEES. It seems this economy has thrived on two factors: cheap FF and the ability of the individual to start and grow his own company. There's a good reason that around 5% of the population controls a large percentage of the wealth. Assuming around 1.5 owners per small business that yields around 4% of population are the business owners. Except for pro athletes and movie stars who should expect to become a millionaire by just getting a paycheck every two weeks?
Maybe the current unemployment rate is just a taste of the future. If businesses have increasing difficulty growing as a result of higher energy prices than 9% employment may be view not too far in the future as the "good ole days". People who look forward to the demise of corporations/business may not have too long to wait to celebrate. Of coarse the additional millions who'll face long term unemployment may not feel like partying with them.
"Except for pro athletes and movie stars who should expect to become a millionaire by just getting a paycheck every two weeks?"
Answer: Sleazy bank employees, stock market traders, CEOs, COOs, CFOs with no investment in the business who have trampled over the backs of their co-workers.
ROCKMAN wrote:
I know, I know, I'm one of them... I do like to think that it's with good reason though; see my post below.
I have nothing against hard-working, competent people getting wealthy. That's the way it should be.
I also firmly believe that small businesses are great, perhaps the best, for creating (real) value, and also keeping it in-country. (In general, not just the US; e.g., I remember reading a study some years back that ascribed France's economic strength to their many small businesses)
BUT (#1):
Much as I sympathize with the OWS-movement, their bashing of the top 1% is wide of the mark; it's not the 1% that's the problem, but the top 0.1%.
And as argued at the link i posted below, it's virtually impossible for a small business owner/entrepreneur to get into the top 0.1%. By including the 99th throught 99.9th in their antagonized group, 9 out of 10 people bashed by the OWS are undeserving of the treatment. If this is what you are trying to say, I agree.
BUT (#2):
Even the wealth concentrated in the top 0.1% would be OK, if they had actually performed valuable services to the society at large. Some of what they do undoubtedly is valuable, but A LOT of it is positively harmful. ("Trickle-down" is greatly overrated, particularly where the top 0.1% is concerned). Activites harmful to society should be forbidden by law. However, to a large degree these parasites write the law, or at least heavily influence the writing of the law. That is not a characteristic of a healthy democracy.
BUT (#3):
Even so, the culture that has been revealed to the public is one of total moral bankruptcy, that to a large degree doesn't even bother to stay within the word of the law. A lot of people should be in jail... virtually none are. Wall Street Isn't Winning – It's Cheating (Taibbi).
From where I'm sitting (in Europe), it looks to me like the US really, really needs to reestablish rule of law, for all, post haste
KODE - Saw your other post...great work. I wonder how many will get your point though. The vast majority of the "rich" in the US are the small business owners (8 million businesses employing less than 100 people each). All other larger US businesses number less than 300,000. IOW 96% of all the companies in the US employ less than 100 folks. These businesses, typically owned by one or two individuals, make up almost all that 5% where all that wealth is "concentrated". As it should be: they own the business that employ 85% of our population. Or more simply: has a poor man every written you a paycheck?
As your other post emphasizes the damage done to our system was by an extremely small percentage of the "rich". But the public doesn't realize that the vast majority of the "rich" they want tax to death are the folks who write the majority of paychecks to America. The calculus seems very simple to me: increase taxes on small businesses and there's less capital to expand and hire. Increase their health care costs (a noble gesture) and there's less capital to expand and hire.
There's a very good reason we aren't seeing unemployment drop IMHO: small businesses are being told they are the target. The public doesn't realize that their rhetoric is being taken this way by the folks who generate almost all the new jobs in our economy. They are hanging on to their capex because they don't know what the future will bring but they know their future is in jeopardy to some degree. And there's that inevitable feedback loop: small businesses resist expanding = more/consistent unemployment = more demand to tax the rich (the 5% of the population that employees 85% of the population) = those 8 million businesses hold back expansion.
Think about it: if small businesses felt confident and if each one just hired 1 new employee that would be 8 million new jobs. Some stats say there are 14 million currently unemployed. That one new job per business would reduce unemployment in the US to a low level never seen before. Just one new job per company. Seems rather simple, eh?
According to the U.S. Census Bureau's Statistics about Small Businesses there were a total of 27.76 million businesses in the USA in 2007. Just over 21.7 million of those were "non-payroll" businesses, that is, they reported having no payroll for paid employees. They were mostly self-employed persons operating as unincorporated small businesses with net income being part or all of the owner's total income.
Of the remaining 6,049,655 businesses, the ones that did report having a payroll, 5,942,758, or 98.2%, fell into your category of "small businesses," i.e., less than 100 employees. Out of a total paid workforce of 120,604,265 in 2007 the small businesses employed 42,693,196 people, or 35.4%. This is a bit shy of employing 85% of our population and a bit shy of being the majority of paychecks received in the USA.
Your argument in a variant of one side of an ongoing disagreement between those who believe the current economic malaise is a result of a failure so far to take actions that would cause the "confidence fairy" to appear and those who think the problem is largely a result of lack of demand. In this case the reason given for the confidence fairy not making her appearance is fear of additional taxes.
The thing is, the "tax the rich" proposals involve upping the marginal rate on taxable incomes above $250,000 to $1,000,000 a year (depending on the proposal). Assume the final target is taxable incomes above $250,000.
Now assume a small business owner with a $300,000 taxable income. The proposed tax hike of 3.6 percentage points would raise his/her taxes by $1,800 (($300K - $250K) * .036). For an owner making $500K in taxable income, the added tax would be $9,000.
Assume adding a worker would generate only an added $10,000 in taxable income for the owner. The tax on that income (old rate of 36% + the additional 3.6%) is 39.6%. The owner nets about $6,000. For the $300K a year owner, that is $4,200 more than he/she made before the new "rich" tax. For the $500K is reduce the loss in income to $3,000.
Refusing to hire a worker who could at minimum reduce the the loss of income due to the "rich" tax makes no sense unless the real problem is lack of demand, which result in failure to cover the cost of the added worker.
The above fails to account for state and local income taxes, if any. The "rich" tax could end up being more than an additional 3.6 percentage points. Owners' income from each additional worker is likely to vary a lot by business and industry. And, the added cost in terms of aggravation and effort required to recruit, train and manage additional workers is not considered. But, it also ignores tax credits that may be available for creating new jobs or training new workers or moving into business areas such as green energy. In any case, the overall question is what should be considered.
According to the 2007 Census Bureau data, of the 5.9 million businesses with less than 100 employees, 3.7 million averaged less than 2 paid workers each. Adding a single employee would increase their personnel costs more than 50%. Another 1 million small businesses employ 7 or less workers and adding a single worker would likely increase their personnel costs by 10% or more. What are the odds of either of those two groups of small businesses adding even a single worker simply because of a surge of confidence resulting from a decision to not raise taxes on high income individuals. I'd say it would be more likely if they anticipated a surge in demand for their services or products.
Hey third Rockman from the sun.
I think you have to remember that we're talking a marginal tax rate on personal income vs increased taxes on company income. A change in the tax rate can affect the way a company does business but the marginal loss for people earning over $150,000 a year isn't significant. The vision people have for a small business owner in this kind of tax bracket is an expensive car, house and tastes. The truth is that these people learnt to set aside initial gains for long term gains, they wouldn't be where they are if they were fiscally undisciplined. The people buying the expensive luxuries are an entirely different group altogether, they are people whom are into the get rich quick schemes or are paid high six figure to seven figure salaries.
The former probably wouldn't notice an increase in taxes as they live well within their means so I don't see how it would affect their long term hiring decisions, especially for small business owners whom employ people in meaningful work. For the latter it wouldn't kill them to buy the latest BMW every two years instead of once a year. In all both have the most to lose from economic problems, when you're flying high you can fall the furthest. The thing they both need the most is fiscal stability and you can't have that with huge deficits. It'd probably be beneficial to them to raise their taxes in the long term.
I have seen business owners (I work for one), who use after tax profit to re-invest in the firm. I.E. they don't do cost benefit analysis or borrow money if the investment looks really good, but use current retained profits for such. Now I would claim this is more of an accounting/legal issue: they want to maintain almost total control of the business, which means all profits look like income to the government, and that means they get taxed at rich peoples rates, even if these owners live frugally their "income" is high.
S - I guess the simplist response to your points is why are we having persistant unemployment if companies have incentive to hire? They either see the potential for growth in their business (and the ability to pay for new employees) or they don't. It doesn't appear that they have the required optimism. We can debate what the exact cause might be but 9% is still 9%.
When I was in the UK I had a small company. I was interested in taking someone on to try and grow the business but was scared off by all he pro employment laws. The worker would have been so heavily protected that once in it would have been hard to get them out if it wasn't working out either in terms of growing the business or whether they were suited.
NAOM
KODE:
There is no sharp dividing line; where above this point all are parasites, and below all are virtuous. The degree of parasitism increases with wealth, but it is not limited to a small clique. Some of the very very wealthy got there by providing a great service or inventing something very useful. And some got there by being parasitic rent seekers. And some are a bit of both. Also a lot in the top 10%, have got there via varirious schemes, such as fliiping real-estate, or collecting fees to manage other peoples money.
I don't subscribe to the small (or large) businesses aren't hiring because they are afraid we will turn around an consifcate their profits. They are afraid there won't be custoners for their product, and thus they won't have the revenue to make payroll. We have to remember, that the wealthy benefit from the public infrastructure that made their success possible. Its not unreasonable to expect something back.
EOS - I agree with you about the havoc a very, very small percentage has caused the system by putting profit above all else. But: "Also a lot in the top 10%, have got there via various schemes". Actually it's about the top 5% that generate most of the wealth and the vast majority of them are small business owners. I stumbled across this fact some months ago and was very surprised to see how lopsided the business size distribution really is. When you take that into account it really is amazing how much influence those very few individuals/companies have on the system. Chatted with Gail the other day about just that. By inventing crap like derivatives and such they greatly magnified their impact on the economy. No one cared as long as the impact was positive. But when they started going south it felt like these "too big" to fail entities were 50% of the economy...or more. I've no idea what they do represent, but I suspect if you were to take away those damaging multiplier instruments they pulled out of the hat, they really represent a very small percentage.
The big corporations are not THE economy. It's the small companies with less than 100 employees that 85% of the population depends upon for a paycheck. And I didn't say confiscate their profits...you did. I pointed out that many of these businesses are hesitant to hire in the face of several POTENTIAL changes that could reduce their net income. Add that to the fear of a declining customer base as you've pointed out. Put yourself in their position given the tone out there now: would you take money out of your savings and expand your biz right now? Remember what you know: they could take every penny from the super rich and it won't come close to satisfying the govt's need. The vast majority of wealth is this country is owned by small businesses. If the govt wants to boost income significantly it has to go after them...that's where the real money is.
To raise a lot of revenue to support services such as universal health care you need to go much lower than small business owners -- you have to target the entire middle class. In Canada an income of only $70,000/year is enough to put you into a pretty high marginal tax rate. As a member of the middle class I sure don't like it, but I have to accept the reality that there are not enough rich people to support the level of spending we expect from government.
j - Sorta like when they asked a theif back in the 30's why he robbed banks. He said the reason was obvious: that's where the money was. Half the workers don't pay fed taxes. I don't judge that as fair or unfair. But it isn't practical especially as the govt is forced to stretch its social coverage over a wide portion of the public. Especially with so much of that expense paid for with borrowed money. As I understand Canadian policies at least a good bit of those high taxes go back to the folks who are paying those high rates. In the US a great many who are benefiting are contributing nothing to the tax base.
Everyone pays Federal taxes in the US. The folks at the bottom just don't pay FIT, they still pay SS and Medicare taxes (as do their employers on their behalf).
As I understand Canadian policies at least a good bit of those high taxes go back to the folks who are paying those high rates
There really isn't that much difference between our countries. The money you spend on invading foreign countries, we spend on health care. That's pretty much the only real difference in spending priorities.
Our spending is split a bit differently between levels of government. And our tax structure is definitely more punitive on the upper end. Which permits our government to run slightly less irresponsible deficits.
Rock, you have to remember that we are in the middle of a propaganda war. One side, who favors eliminating almost all regulation, and radically cutting taxes on the wealthy, says the continuing recession is because of "regulatory uncertainty". But there isn't a scrap of evidence that that is true, and a ton of evidence that it is a lack of demand. For one, the number of proposed regulations has not changed much (although business owners who've bought the rightwing scare tactics might fear it). Now regulations and taxes, are somewhat different issues. But the big brake on spending/demand is that the middle classes have unsustainable, debt, and are worried about the future -thus saving more and spending less. Some of the middle class regression is bacuse a large number of government jobs have been cut, and pay cuts demanded etc. There really has been a class war going on, stripping the assets from the middle and lower classes and giving them to the superwealthy.
EOS - I get the propaganda war all too well. It's a big part of my pessimistic outlook. As long as both sides of the political spectrum are intent on inflaming issues for the sake of solidifying their base instead of trying to reach some compromise I see little reason to expect any positive response to our worsening situation. It seems to have nothing to do with solving the program and everything to do with giving the appearance of change while demonizing the other side. I see both R's and D's equaly guilty in this regard.
You've probably seen my response to "the regs are keeping us from drilling". Obviously it's because I've been in the oil patch for 36 years and have never experienced any serious hindrance to drilling as a result of the regs. But you'll never get anyone on the far right to accept the truth. And there are just as many unfounded rants from the far left. And, as you imply, no one can hear the truth above the yelling of the two extremes. And IMHO that's exactly how the political system likes it. As long as they can convince folks that all our problems were caused by "them" they can avoid the spot light being thrown on themselves.
Parasitic rent seekers? The house or building that you live or work in cost money to build/buy, it didn't just spring up out of the ether. Unless you live under a highly restrictive government, you have the freedom to choose whether you want to purchase and own your building/land or whether you want to rent it from someone else. The relationship between a landlord and tenant is symbiotic, not parasitic. Parasites take from their host without giving anything back... landlords give back a place to live/work, take care of the major bills, fix the roof/appliances, pay the taxes, and have to pay to fix up the place if a less than responsible tenant damages the place. If you, as tenant believe that you are getting the short end of the stick, you can move, or alternatively, purchase your own residence.
Rent seeking is an economics technical term for collecting money without further production.
Actually charging rent for use of real estate is only one form it takes, shareholders who collect capital gains or dividends are also rent seeking, as are paper commodity traders and especially traders in derivatives.
And I think of rent seekers such as patent trolls. Buy up the patent rights of bankrupt companies, then sue businesses that infringe on them. Or pharma companies that obtain a monopoly on a given drug, and use it as a cash cow.
Now, some is quite legitimate. I own some divident paying investments, and consider those modest "rents" I recieve to be well earned (by socking away my money to buy them). So rent seeking i itself isn't bad. Its just that if you get too much of an "ownership society", those who are born without property are then screwed.
Theres always a battle, between capital and labor, as to how to divide up the fruits of production. Both factors are needed for the economy to function. Society will function best if some reasonable compromise is made so both can recieve decent income. If things become too one-sided, then things head south. I'd say in the USA, capital has been winning far too frequently lately (mainly by control of politicians and media), so that labor is getting the hort end of the stick. Not healthy when it becomes seriously imbalanced.
Rockman,
I was not speaking to growth of a middle class, I think I am trying to communicate that the mere existence of a middle class seems to be due to inexpensive FF (Fossil Fuel) and all the labor it provides to the middle class.
My self-insight is the feeling/theory/hypothesis that as inexpensive FF availability sunsets globally, the middle class will fade away and sunset as well.
flash - I agree. It seems intuitive. The majority of middle class folks work for small US companies many of which offer non-critical services/products. Back to my favorite whipping boy: Starbucks. The coffee slingers may fall just below middle class but such jobs can be stepping stones to the better paying slots in the middle. And then you have the managers/owners of such joints. EverY $ spent on increased energy costs is one less discretionary $ that goes to the middle class and lower workers. And we can't turn an espresso machine jockey into a solar panel engineer. I can't envision our society with many of those jobs permanently eliminated. But it seems inevitable.
A Sky-High Tide, This Time Fleeting, but Perhaps a Glimpse of Torrents to Come
FOR ALL
"BG Group will export liquefied natural gas from the United States under a landmark $8 billion deal with Cheniere Energy that will allow domestic producers to ship bountiful shale gas supplies to the world for the first time."
About time IMHO. The American people have been skating by on cheap energy too long. Especially true for NG. Hopefully the exports will dry up our over supply and get prices moving up. Would be really helpful to keep all the SG plays booming and thus make all the cornucopians happy.
Of course, it may raise consumer costs but can't make everyone happy.
There is no better incentive to conserve and improve efficiency than higher prices :-)
Both Home Depot and Lowe's have R-30 unfaced fiberglass insulation (31+ sq ft) on special now for $9.99/9.97.
A long term investment (with a 10% tax credit for principal residences).
Best Hopes for Lower Carbon Emissions and Greater Efficiency,
Alan
Don't worry Rock, I assure you Cheniere isn't the only group working on substantial LNG exports ;) Looks like Cheniere "could" be online as early as 2015. Combined with at least one additional project, I expect by 2016-2017 Americans will be paying a lot more for gas (electricity) than they are now.
Damn that global economy and stuff.
One of my buddies has a friend who is working for Chevron on a research project in the (kerogen) oil shale in Colorado. My buddy says his friend is working on a cold (solvent?) in-situ extraction process that has very high capital costs but a break-even point of $100 per barrel. Fracking is involved as well. Anyone got any more information on this?
I remember a university project from 6-9 month ago for a solvent that could free (not convert) oil without being used up. Some issues IIRC, and bench level. Might be that.
Edit: Found it:
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-03-cleanly-oil-tar-sands-fouled.html
Letter from ASPO-USA to Energy Secretary Steven Chu
My guess is that Dr. Chu will be a no-show (wouldn't want to lend legitamacy to extreme ideas ;-/, but nothing ventured, nothing gained.
ASPO is not the only one asking questions...
Out with the old, in with the new... ?
The latest issue of the EIA's This Week in Petroleum predicts a 7 million barrel a day growth in non-OPEC production between 2010 and 2035. About 3 million barrels per day of that, they say, will come from Brazil and the other 4 mb/d will come from "other non-OPEC". It is their cover story this week, all about Brazil offshore.
Ron P.
Brazil's net imports of petroleum liquids increased from 2005 to 2010, and from 2009 to 2010 (BP). Combined net exports from Canada, Mexico, Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina and Colombia fell from 5.1 mbpd in 2005 to 4.0 mbpd in 2010.
WT: no data please.
Thanks
WeekendPeak
I hope you're joking.
Maybe he means that WT's data with Julia Robertsa isn't getting any more likely, if her availability is going to be anything like CERA's estimated 'Reproductive Capacity'
From 2005 to 2011, Yergin's estimate for when we get the promised 20% increase in productive "Capacity" increased at 20%/year, from 6 years in 2005 to 20 years in 2011. At this rate of increase, in 2016, he will estimate that it will take 55 years to get the promised 20% increase in "Capacity."
Jeff,
"Capacity" ...
is that something which is in the eye of the in-capacitated? (Like beauty and the eye of its beholder?)
Jeff has http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIDLC8M4R28
The extend to which media/ people at large are willing to ignore fairly obvious fact is disturbing.
Rgds
WeekendPeak
Highly Enriched Fukushima?
Uranium from the soil of Aizu Wakamatsu
The work was done by Chris Busby's team. Anyone any thoughts?
On another uranium concern, Chris Busby is also in the news for new findings supposedly showing slightly enriched uranium in Fallujah, Iraq. This came as a surprise to them because they had expected to find evidence of depleted uranium. Busby has theories ranging from the plausible to "science-fiction" (his own words). Interviewed yesterday by RT Moscow at US uranium to blame for deformed babies in Fallujah?.
Whatever is going on in Fallujah, here's what the BBC found when they visited last year to check the health claims and found them to be apparently true - Fallujah children's 'genetic damage'. The BBC report was broadcast long before the latest findings.
I woulda thunk there wasn't much case for using DU rounds in Fallujah. They are used for armour penetration, i.e. against enemy tanks. I don't think the insurgents had any tanks, so why were we (assuming we did) using DU?
MY thought is that I did hear a "rumor" a few weeks ago, through an old friend in Oak Ridge, that something other than "just generating power" may have been occurring at that site. That's all. I just tucked it away in a brain corner somewhere, not expecting to hear it again. I've not seen a good aerial photo of the Fukashima site, not that I looked at with that in mind, anyway. So I will tuck this away as a "second clue."
I do know that it takes less space to enrich HEU in centrifuges (current technology) than it used to in the many, Many, MANY cascades of cylinders at the older gaseous diffusion plants.
Interesting photo at the bottom of this document.
http://www.fas.org/pubs/pir/2011spring/Manhattan-Project.pdf
Where we used to make HEU, just "over the river and through the woods" from me.
Lizzy
Fukushima nuke pollution in sea 'was world's worst'
One of the reactors was fueled off MOX (recycled mixed oxide fuel - some Pu, etc.).
I do not have time to trace the probable daughter products of such fuel, after powering a reactor for over a year. However, the mix will be different than virgin fuel.
Alan
http://www.smu.edu/News/2011/geothermal-24oct2011.aspx
Here is a Slashdot discussion:
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/11/10/26/1549240/google-releases-geotherm...
saw that today. IMO if they can google off some pressure from the Yellowstone plume that would be best - just a few billions of gigawatts please.
Hey good news the Sun is already here just waiting for us to soak up it's solar energy.All we need is a few panels and maybe a bit more advanced tech to get us there sooner.I like the Solar Infographic a Man came up with,it really hits home on the awesome power of the star we call the sun.
http://www.solargaines.com/solarpowergraphic.html
Complex societies are less resilient than low tech societies?
I have always thought that low tech societies that is societies that use "renewable" energy e.g. wood are more resilient and adaptive to change. I've always assume this and never bother to look further until the subject came up with a friend. We were talking about energy source diversity. Am I right and if so do Tainter, Orlov, Diamond, Heinberg and other support this view? Are there good passages that can shed light from these authors?
Cinch
I think it's going to be largely a question of bottlenecks, and you can get those in complex AND in simple societies, where their livelihood and essentials hinge on vulnerable supplies or processes.
Complexity can (and will) break down, but if you have also got alternate pathways around those systems, you might get away with it.. OUR complexity has so many components/systems that depend on common, and 'semi-invisible' resources like Oil, which carries the weight and does the work repeatedly throughout the day, that we are particularly vulnerable to an interruption, it seems..
Even a very basic and simple society can be hit by a simple resource challenge, like drought, and have nowhere to turn.
Also keep in mind that efficiency is the opposite of resilience.
I don't think that follows. Sure if something is optimized for a particular set of conditions without consideration that those conditions might change, that doesn't support resilience. But efficiency by itself leads to a sort of resilience (needs fewer resources to continue). It not efficiency that destroys resilience, but efficiency pursued under the assumption that operating conditions will stay in a very anrrow range, that is dangerous.
I think there is quite a bit of difference between those things.
It's Thomas Homer-Dixon who makes the argument that efficiency is the opposite of resilience, in The Upside of Down. I think he's right. Efficiency means there's no slack in the system. Kunstler calls efficiency "the straightest path to hell."
iirc Nassim Taleb talks about "antifragility" (somewhat like resilience) in similar terms.
I think the term efficiency has been mis-defined as the extreme minimum of operating inputs, and (like quantum) I can see why people start putting similarly extreme analyses onto it..
It's not necessarily tied to a rule of scarcity as much as one of functionality, which would include storage, a degree of fat on the bone, and not one of operating simply right at MOL, as the bookkeeping department and a shortsighted CEO might prefer.
The root, 'Efficare' - really relates to 'Getting it done well' and is parallel to Effective, so the implications of stripping away ALL excess and running something at a bare minimum is really not an essential part of the word Efficient. It really means optimum.
Of course, I find Kunstler in that above argument to be just as 'Efficient' (from his own definition, anyway) as ever, which is to say oversimplified, brittle and built without sufficient reinforcement to really operate on anything but a fairly narrow track. Self-fulfilling prophecy?
(I don't think the one really follows the other. You can use resources frugally, AND also store your 'seventh year of grain' as well.. it just doesn't compute automatically in a Nation that doesn't save.
In the McDonough book 'From Cradle to Cradle', he also feels 'efficient' has been overtaken with this suggestion of anorexic deprivation, but instead of redefining it, he uses 'effective' in its place.
"It really means optimum."
I don't think so. It means getting the _maximum_ output from a given input or inputs. (There is often a dishonest or partial accounting of what constitutes inputs - externalities - so the resulting accounting of efficiency is bogus.)
To optimize means to get the _best_ possible outcome from a given input. The definition of "best" can be debated, and in our society often gravitates towards "maximum output", in which case efficiency is indeed similar to optimum.
But nowadays surely we are beginning to think about folding such concepts as sustainability, social justice, environmental issues, etc. into our concept of "best". In any case, maximum is not always optimum.
Well, as with 'Quantum' up above, or Bill Clinton's 'What is is..' here we get to decide what assumptions we will attach to a concept, and how broadly to apply its defining boundaries.. and yet try to not ignore the assumptions that most folks, whoever that is.. the 98.8%? put into these sorts of terms.
Is 'Efficient' and even 'Optimal' weighed with an eye towards long-term effects and resiliency, or is it an absolute and immediate concern, merely for the here and now? I simply refuse to accept narrow-minded definitions of such concepts.. they are too important to be stereotyped.. they can both aid AND do harm.. it's all in the application. (McDonough reminded us that no-one wanted to see an 'Efficient' Concentration Camp..)
Is it not going to be considered Optimal or highly Efficient to have invested some resources (for some given system, say) into having a plan B standing by, or overbuild for the 1000year outlier event, or to 'overinsulate', or to leave extra junctions in the design for future adaptations, carry a backup fuel supply,.. or are these purely wasteful externalities, frill to be considered unrelated to Inputs vs Outputs in the Immediate?
I'm willing to be very particular about the assumptions behind a word like this, as I am with words like 'Renewables', since they are used so broadly (as with Kunstler above), and they get attacked pretty mercilessly under these Broad Stroke Banners in order to defend the 'Any Action will MERELY ENGENDER UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES!- Thus, Do Not Rock This Boat!' position that is so well entrenched.
As you closed with,
"maximum is not always optimum." .. That is usually my point, and vice versa. Many solutions quickly turn sour when taken to the extreme, or when assumed and extrapolated into an extreme. You can surely drown in milk..
Moderation, and not Demonization or Blind Adulation, in all things.. ok, MOST things.
The criticisms of efficent as optimum, and optimun seeking as short sighted, are easily resolvable by expanding the metric. A metric is some mechanism for placing on value on the results of a process. Roll in externalities, and robustness to tail risk, and the concept works just fine. We should be arguing about the working definition of value that goes into the metric, not about the concept of efficiency. Demonize efficiency, and you create a "waste is good" mentality.
I've seen that sort of thing happen with poorly designed rationing schemes. We have a drought, anyone using more than 80% of last years water will be severely fined! This puts the guy who carefully husbanded his water use during wet years at a serious disadvantage -so the mentality becomes, use water in excess, so during the bad years your allotment will be enough. But, again, this is another case of a bad metric which implicitly assumes everyone was using the resource with equal efficiency.
Thank you all. I think both of us got our conversation partly wrong or at least were talking pass one another. What we really ought to be focusing on is energy diversity as it relates to resiliency. Come to think of it, I can't think of any culture in the past or present that make a conscious effort in diversify their energy sources, and I think it has a lot to do with economic competitiveness. Some might think that we have a diverse set of energy sources today, but really it is mostly fossil fuels. Hydroelectric and fission are not big players. Society is not some big superorganism but rather a collection of competing interests all vying for better living standards. Economics dictate that they use the most affordable energy source available, consequently, alternatives never gets develop into what they could be.
I can't think of any culture in the past or present that make a conscious effort in diversify their energy sources
Denmark has quite deliberately diversified their fuel sources.
- They CREATED economic wind turbines as a viable energy source.
- CHP is the dominant source of home heat - most fueled by NG but a good minority by various renewables (garbage, wood chips, sewage and landfill methane, etc.)
- They built undersea HV DC transmission to Norway and Sweden to access their hydro and trade their wind when in surplus.
- By 2015, 50% of urban trips will be by bicycle in Copenhagen, a quite deliberate choice of mode. Their second subway line (a circle) should be finished by 2018. Similar emphasis on bicycling in the rest of Denmark.
A diversification of transportation fuels (muscle & electricity).
- Their one and only coal fired plant is the world's second most efficient.
- Conservation & Efficiency are going strong in Denmark
- Denmark is experimenting with EVs.
Scientists predict faster retreat for Antarctica's Thwaites Glacier
Weathering Fights - Science - What's It Up To?
The problem with peer reviewed science is that only scientists are qualified to judge whether the science is correct or not. It's the perfect scam!
Those who can't deal with reality are condemned to experience it.
Unfortunately for a lot of things, only experts understand the issue well enough to make an informed judgement. The rest of the people may go on gut instinct, but thats a poor guide to truth. The scientific method has been the most successful truth finding methodology we humans have found.
The GOP Hates Bikes:
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/10/gop-hates-bikes
So many folks do not have the sight picture on where the World is headed wrt Limits to Growth...
I'm sure in the D.C. cigar bars they are snickering about taking the 'freebie bikes' from the 'dirty hippies'.
A military officer once worked on a base I was at...his jacked up Jeep had some bumper stickers...one said 'Nuke the Hippies...Dirty Dirty Hippies'.
Well he sounds like an ungrateful lazy government worker that should be fired before cutting the bike program.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45042383/ns/politics/#.TqjXMrJpgQp
Foreign mining company...not going to pay any royalties to the U.S....said company accused of aiding/abetting genocide and war crimes in Papua New Guinea...probably going to export the copper to China....no doubt will be showered with tax breaks, and absolved of responsibility to remediate the mining site...
A Date with Fictional History
Today, October 26, 2011 is the 26th anniversary
of the fictional date on which Marty McFly put the pedal to the medal,
reached 88 MPH in his souped up Delorean
and traveled "Back to the Future"
Is our "now" something he would have expected back then?
________________________________
Run for it Marty, it's the Libyans!
heh, loved that movie. but fear not those of you who mistakenly believe the car culture can be saved. you can buy your own electric DeLorean in 2013.
http://automotivediscovery.com/the-new-2013-delorean-ev-gets-some-test-r...
you just need 90-100k in cold hard cash. Libyan plutonium not included.
Just so you don't think I'm setting up my financing for one of those, Kaiser, I just spent the morning building the steering mechanism for my 'Chitty Chitty Bang Bang' Pedal Electric Micro-Car, made from Electric Scooter parts, Treadmill, Bicycle and other free junk. It's officially for our Halloween Parade, but my ulterior motives are pretty obvious at this point.
A toy? Sure, why not?
whoosh. that's the sound of you mixing up a joke with seriousness. that's what my post was, a joke. For those of you who have not seen the movie the time machine was a electric car powered by plutonium provided by the Libyans for the doc to make a nuclear bomb. he instead gave them a bomb made from pinball machine parts and use the plutonium to make a mini reactor for powering the car. a bit unsafe in a crash, fuel would be expensive, but i bet you could make several round trips across the usa on a single tank!
advocating a 10-40k solar pv system to a person or family living pay check to pay check makes that system a toy, as in nice to have but can't afford toy.
building a motorized scooter car from spare parts taken from trendy exercise equipment, old car batteries(i assume that's what your using)and a bicycle or two. that't not a toy, that's going to be the future of motorized transport.
A few days ago Iaato posted a link to An Investment Manager's View on the Top 1% (thanks!), but sadly in a dying thread. Sadly, because it is very, very good.
Some excerpts:
I saved the best quote for last:
I wonder what the nature of that cynicism is. If she really didn't believe in what she was doing why would she (and her peers) continue to work there and not find something more fulfilling? Or perhaps, were they also cynical of the fact that someone would simply take her place to continue the same behavior? Or perhaps they were afraid to lose what they had...people with something to lose are the hardest to change.
I wonder what that client is doing now in her early thirties.
I've got this picture of a bunch of bright and angry rats, getting ready to hop off of this "sinking, stinking ship" into their waiting speedboat .. as they curse about how easy it was for them to gnaw through that cheap-assed hull..
Hoping someday to see people like her drawn and quartered and what's left of them slowly roasting on a spit over an open fire!
I can excuse ignorance to some extent but not those who know the damage they are doing and do it regardless! May they all die slow and very painful deaths...
Agreed FM.
One problem - were gonna need a lot of of spits and open fires...
My neighbor was a RE appraiser, and like Tanta at Calculated Risk he knew for years what was happening was criminal - but he was not in charge of the rules and had to compete based on the rules.
My credit union kept the "good mortgages" and was very happy to process the criminal mortgages and then sell them to Freddie/Fannie. My very good friends there knew the whole time what was happening was criminal. But they had no choice - every other financial institution in town was playing by those rules, they could not compete if they suddenly got morals or ethics.
Who made the rules the past 20+ years that led to this illness?
Greenspan and the NY Fed in particular , Treasury Secretaries, Key Congresspersons, Key
The SEC/FDIC etc continue to coddle the criminals today - fines equal to a small fraction of the gains on the Frauds - AND no real criminal charges.
Why ???
Because the laws were destroyed to the point they fear they cannot get convictions (so they say, and it might be true).
After the Revolution, we start the New Nuremberg Trials
Hopefully Oakland's General Strike next week goes viral and the whole nation just sits down.
Just do not participate. Do. Not. Spend.
Because The Rules
Thank you for a fascinating article.
KODE,
I wouldn't get overly concerned about the exactitude of the percentage. The dominant reason for the percentage is for use as a marching chant. The front half of march chants, "Who is the 99%?" and the back half of march chants, "We are the 99%!"
The true problem is the control of government by people in the 1%. Demand development with goal of fixing the inequity inherent in current system and policy is tough work. One of many proposals under review is to end electoral college and winner take all elections. Many demands may not be implementable via Congressional law and may require Constitutional amendment.
Last October, 5 college students arrested on the Brooklyn Bridge, answered their lawyer's question, "What do you want out of this movement?. We want The 99% Declaration. The lawyer futilely championed the Declaration at the New York City General Assembly (OWS NYCGA) but higher priorities of food and park survival occupied the Occupiers. Seeking an audience in a Yahoo group, the lawyer put The 99% Declaration online. Enthusiastic response exploded into thousands of emails per day and one astute and technically savvy reader created the 99% Declaration forum for robust peer review.
Currently, we are independent of Occupy Wall Street (OWS) and NYCGA. The forum of draft reviewers has grown considerably including people from US, Canada, Norway, France, Singapore, Germany and many other disparate locales. All are welcome and all are encouraged to help shape who we are and move us forward.
For those whose day is lifted by a victory for the environment :-
Breaching of dam unleashes flood of water, emotions
"WHITE SALMON — Davis Washines watched in awe, then bowed his head. He wiped tears from his eyes.
The sight of the White Salmon River rushing freely through the base of Condit Dam — released for the first time in 98 years Wednesday by a ground-shaking detonation of 700 pounds of dynamite — set off a rush of emotion for Washines and dozens of others watching on a live video feed, just a short walk from the blast site."
Video :-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fx9uUZwMUV0
Next-Rodman Reservoir. If only we could be so lucky.
*poof* an average of 79,700 MWh per year of Carbon-free baseload electricity gone. Just like David Washines, I cry a little bit too at the loss. Oh well, we can always replace it with natural gas, coal or nuclear, so its not like there is any downside whatsoever.
We're already experiencing downsides from having overbuilt Hydro, in any case.
There are river systems that need to flow again, and restore imbalanced ecosystems. It's not ONLY about the carbon.
Couldn't run of river hydro be put on those newly freed up streams? I'm sure it isn't as efficient as big dams, but at least the power isn't a dead loss. I think most of the environmental damage from the dams comes in the first few years -filling the reservoir, so tearing it down doesn't fix most of the damage (at least not for a long time). Seems to me there as some real tunnel vision going on in many of these cases (my river is all important, global carbon emissions, are just an externality)!
I'm working directly with the people here;
www.penobscotriver.org
..and while they are clear about their goals of restoring the sea-run fish populations in the Penobscot rivershed in particular, they are not narrow in scope by any means. They have gotten where they did with direct cooperation with both PPL, the owner of the Hydro generation on the river, the Penobscot Nation, several enviro, community and fishing orgs, state wildlife depts.. they are looking at the big picture of the Groundfish Breeding zones out in Penobscot Bay, at Power generation, at public interaction with the natural world, very much at Carbon Emissions.
But like the EROEI discussions we have here, or the parsing of 'Efficiency' elsewhere on the thread, 'It's Complicated'. There are Many factors beyond Carbon, and we have to make sure WE don't get tunnel vision about it.
Wind and Hydro are both large-scale industrial processes, we do have to take responsibility for their impact, and groups like these are the actors in this field, is that even when we really need more carbon-free electricity, we also need to see where any of our industrial intrusions into the natural world will be creating unacceptable disturbances..
Frankly, the 'Tunnel Vision' award goes just as much to any of us who have been inured into the belief that we need and deserve all the cheap electricity that we get. It's a precious and valuable gift, and we totally take it for granted, and get extremely hot when someone suggests that we might ration our usage a bit, knowing that there are costs from it that lie on someone else's shoulders because of our voracious appetite for cheap juice.
It really is tough to have to limit something that we know could help with the CO2.. but we do. Don't tell my wife.. she's overwhelmed.
Gore Calls for Carbon Free Electric Power
This was from back in 2008. Personally, I'm not a big Al Gore fan. I didn't vote for him in 2000, and I don't think he is a particularly good public speaker, as he has a strong tendancy to "talk down" to his audience in the way that one would try to explain something to a particularly slow-witted child. Regardless, he is absolutely correct in this case. I also found it sadly amusing that (pre-election) President Obama was quoted in the article mentioning the "urgency of the threat". Its a good thing that our President dealt with the threat so effectively and decicivly since his election in 2008... (/sarc off)
Anyway, I linked a few sites below dealing with the impacts of global warming/climate change on salmon, the species that seemingly benefits the most from dam removal.
ScienceDaily: Global Warming Heats Up Urgency of Salmon Recovery Efforts
Defenders of Wildlife:Effects of Global Warming on Trout and Salmon in US Streams
World Wildlife Foundation: Salmon and Global Warming
I'm all for improving fish passage around dams whenever possible, but realize that losing salmon runs on some rivers, might help to prevent losing salmon runs on all rivers. Food for thought...
It's definitely a very tight needle to thread, Runeshade.. but as with the Penobscot issue I'm more closely tied to, it's not just the Salmon.. it's about a simply massive movement of multiple species that interact with the river and are fed by the 'bloodflow' of water and life through the hydrologic systems. www.penobscotriver.org
What we've done by blocking those flows is essentially weakened the robustness of the environmental 'immune systems' no less than we've done that to ourselves with our sedate and blocked lifestyles, sitting at computers and in cars, etc..
There are all manner of compromises that will have to be arduously hammered out..
Here's what I've been humming for my 99% song.. if the fit isn't too tortured..
"If you haven't got a Penny then a Ha'penny will do,
If you haven't got a Ha'penny, then God Bless You!"
If my memory serves me, isn't the Penobscot project different because there will be no net loss of hydroelectricity? I thought I heard that there was an arrangement whereas some other dam(s) were going to be allowed to produce more power than previously. I could be confused, but I'm all for that kind of bargain. I just hate to see dam removal touted as an environmental win, without any consideration of the loss of carbon-free electricity and the new pollution that will occur in most cases by replacing it with fossil fuels. I also find it interesting that many folks act as if the lake created by a dam is an enviromental wasteland, instead of a habitat for (different) wildlife.
Regardless, I don't think many people would cheer dam removal if each dam removed was replaced by a coal-burning facility, preferably located in that person's hometown.
"For PacifiCorp, the Condit Dam removal was fundamentally a “business decision,” said company president Michael Dunn. Removing the dam will cost about $33 million, but the price of keeping the hydroelectric facility functioning and up to date simply outweighed its benefits, he said."
Jim Cramer on CNBC this morning: "We will be a big net exporter of energy, even as we import energy from OPEC."
Here is what BP shows for the ratios of US consumption to production (C/P) for 1998 to 2010 for coal, natural gas and oil:
We are just barely self-sufficient in coal, consuming 95% of production in 2010, and a few years ago, we were a net coal importer for a year or two. In 2010, our natural gas consumption exceeded production by 12%, and our oil consumption exceeded production by 155%.
I am guessing Cramer didn't show this chart when he was making his prediction? He seems to have a good imagination to go along with his enthusiasm. He should have been a geologist.
The UK's Department of Energy and Climate Change released fuel production statistics for August 2011 today and here's the DECC's headline from the total energy table:
Below is a summary table for the Jan-Aug period for the past four years:
DECC statistics for UK energy here.
New short story from the Anthology ”I’m With the Bears" ....
David Mitchell’s "The Siphoners" which follows an elderly couple struggling to survive in a lawless future society where oil prices have skyrocketed to $800 a barrel.
IEA releases latest statistics on global CO₂emissions
Exxon Mobil: A Profit-Making Machine Despite Falling Production
Arctic chill brings Facebook data center to Sweden
That much waste heat should be plugged into local district heating system.
Alan
That's a good thought, but during summer they would still need the infrastructure to dump the heat.
Similar problem to PNW hydropower - excess during one season - drought the next.
PNW ?
Best Hopes for Universal Knowledge of all Acronyms :-P
Alan
Pacific NorthWest
:-)
PNW = Pacific Northwest
For those outside the US, that would be the states of Washington, Oregon and Idaho, though some might argue for parts of N. California or even British Columbia.
Poll: Americans Aren't Optimistic About Energy
Judging by the first poll, consumers aren’t feeling optimistic. The 20-minute survey, taken by 3,406 Americans September 14-25, found what McCombs School Dean Tom Gilligan calls “a general level of angst and insecurity”:
ConocoPhillips, Penn State Energy Prize for airborne wind turbines
Just reading an article on North Dakota's oil boom, so I went and pulled up some of the numbers.
Looks like in this past summer, production was 360,000 barrels a day or less then 2% of US oil consumption.
I went to look at Alaska's production numbers and they've gone from a peak of 2,086,000 barrels a day in March of 1988 to a bone chilling 453,000 barrels a day this past summer (July)... Wow... Don't see this mentioned much in MSM (or ever). North Dakota is a blip, yet is being played to be America's answer to our oil addiction (not even close).
Here is the oil boom story:
http://rockcenter.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/10/27/8495501-now-hiring-nort...
I just looked at the North Dakota Industrial Commission website for their oil production. It is incredible how available the data is! To bad Saudi Arabia was not this way. Anyway, the latest monthly production that is available is August 2011 and it was 13.77 million barrels for the month. This is 444,000 bbls per day. This is up from 330,000 barrels per day in August of 2010. It will not save us from peak oil, but they do seem to be doing pretty good. Way back in 2004 (7 years ago) they were making only 80,000 BPD.
I looked into detail into Alaskan oil production a year ago or so.
A good % of production comes from new small fields - most went into production @ 2000 and are not yet significantly depleting. Three small fields are above Prudhoe Bay and are aggregated with Prudhoe Bay, but I found a separate source for their production.
Prudhoe Bay itself was at 14% of peak and falling about 10%/year. The smaller fields mask this effect.
Best Hopes for the Truth about Depletion,
Alan
Another example of the corporate usurping the citizen
Study Questions Outsourcing Traffic Camera Systems
Governments must plan for migration in response to climate change, researchers say
Translation - There will be no planned migrations
The desire of people to migrate is inversely proportional to the desire of people to accept migrants. If the world truly gets into a state where hundreds of millions of people are wanting to get up and move someplace safer the places they would want to go to are going to be far less accepting. People in Europe and America etc aren't going to be nearly as accommodating if their own people are already suffering. I figure the best sign that the world has truly gone to hell is when 1st world countries cut their aid budgets to zero.
Squilliam
it is already happening here in Europe, these here are so called refugees from the fighting in Tunisia and Libya on the island of Lampudusa an Italian island between Italy and Africa. Notice that they are all testosterone driven young males.They had got a bit pissed off because the Italians where not moving them from the holding centres on the Island quick enough too the Italian mainland so they burnt down the centres. This will be nothing compared to millions of starving Egyptians moving up through the Sinai. We live in interesting times.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5wc6KC6FPI
Jeremy Rifkin's article at least shows recognition of the connection of Peak Oil to the Global economic collapse and the need for Green Energy sources.
But he follows stereotypical cornucopianism with statements like this:
Although it is certainly true that we need to build a distributed Green Energy
infrastructure there is no way we can power, build and maintain the hugely
inefficient auto addiction of the fossil fuel era.
Nor can we hope to match the energy output of fossil fuels with Green Energy sources. What Rifkin leaves out as do so many adherents projecting economic growth forever is the first rule of Ecology - "REDUCE!".
Instead of investing in electric personal cars weighing 2000 lbs to carry a 200 lb passenger, taking a football field of space for every 5 cars, requiring
enormous maintenance of all the highway lanes, parking lots, etc while killing 30,000 per year in the US, we need to reduce personal cars as much as possible.
The same for buildings - we should be reducing their energy usage via insulation and efficiency as much as possible.
To reiterate what so many know on TOD - for the USA auto addiction accounts for
almost 70% of oil usage and generates almost 38% of greenhouse emissions directly. Indirectly it is far more when you count all the ancillary costs like traffic cops, ambulances, traffic courts, endless maintenance and wasted
green land area.
Stand alone Corporate Office buildings in a sea of asphalt demand auto addicted
transport but also do not benefit from the insulating effects of more density.
Likewise with residences.
Of course Europe is far head of the USA in this respect but will still need to go a lot further towards Green Transit to reduce consumption to the levels which can reasonably be generated with renewable energies.
9 million people have a special holiday this weekend. The water may peak in the city on Saturday but I don't get a sense that anybody really knows what to expect or what to do.
Flood centre tells Bangkokians to take a vacation
I was picking up MC 252 (that is what the shop calls it) tarballs with a team of 8 and the conversation turned to science. I was flabbergasted that only 3 of the 8 believed in evolution. Only one besides me believed that there are more stars in the sky than all the grains of sand on all the world's beaches. I think I heard it on NOVA once. Could one of you scientist or learned persons tell me, was I wrong about the size of our known universe? Numbers would be even better.
Let me guess ... those were the upright walking ones.
No, they were all educated in Alabama.
As was I.
Tuscaloosa High School and University of Alabama undergraduate degree (BS Physics, Math Minor).
17 National Merit Scholars in my graduating class of less than 400.
Best Hopes,
Alan
Alabama has a wide dichotomy when it comes to education. Alabama illiteracy rate? 15%. Tuscaloosa County illiteracy rate? 14%. Bullock County illiteracy rate? 34%. The state rate of 15% when compared to Mexican States would rate in the BOTTOM 20%. Nothing to be proud of, 80% of Mexico is more literate than Alabama.
Sources: http://nces.ed.gov/naal/estimates/StateEstimates.aspx
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mexican_states_by_literacy_rate
If you take the Mexican 2005 figures then Alabama drops off the scale. The basic schools down here are, well, basic but they do hammer the fundamentals in. There is a system of Becas (grants) that enable even poor children to get places in upper schools and an adult literacy program. You have to really try hard not to be literate to succeed.
NAOM
Sad part is that one hundred years ago, the numbers in the U.S. would have been reversed. I don't have comparative figures, but you would have been very lucky if 3 out of 8 in the age of Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson would have believed in a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis. Evolution would have been taken as a given, one more piece in a widening body of science. Perhaps it's part of the pervasive dummying down of our culture and a growing anti-intellectualism among talking heads.
There are moments when I worry less about resource scarcity and more about the replacement of reason with delusion and fantasy.
Beam me up Scotty. There's no intelligent life down here.
I loved one comment I read on RealClimate today. The gist was, scientists can't be controlled by priests, things were just great before they came along. Now, they are trying to take back what they had before the enlightenment.
I can try to give you some numbers, cuz astronomy is kinda my field of expertise. :D
So. We have this nice universe of ours, with it's mass currently being estimated at 1.59 x 1055 kg.
Our star, Sun, has mass around 2 x 1030 kg. Of course, our star is one of the little ones actually, a yellow dwarf. So let's be generous and say the average mass of stars is 3 orders of magnitude higher, around 1 x 1033 kg. This gives us around 1 x 1022 stars in the universe.
Just very rough number, but you surely get the picture how many of them are possibly out there...
Now the hard part - counting all the grains of sand on all the world's beaches. :))
In physics we love to simplify stuff. All I need you to do is to count all the sand grains in one cubic centimeter (or inch, if you prefer this unit), multiply it with area of all beaches in square cm (or inches respectively) and then, here comes the simplifying, multiply it with average 3 inch thickness of beach's sand layer. These 3 inches are just my WAG, of course and can/should be adjusted accordingly. :P
If you come up with number lower than 1022, then you'll know you were [probably] right. ;)
Hurricane Kenna moved some of the sand on our beaches and exposed the bases of old beach huts. They were about 3m down.
NAOM
Hmmm...I thought that the lower the mass of a star class (O,B, G, then lower mass= K, then lower yet =M), the more numerous the stars in that class in the Universe?
I thought I read that by far the most numerous stars are in the M or red dwarf class.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_dwarf
Mass distribution of stars near Sol, according to this NASA site:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1980A%26A....87..136H
Maybe a few more grains of sand...
Of course! And enemy of state is right, too. That's why I wrote it is a very rough number, because I (not mentioning it) adjusted the mass for black holes, also massive black holes now presumed to be in the center of every galaxy (it would count as one star, wouldn't it..?), quasars, etc. (there is still a little problem with dark matter (and unicorns :D), of course :-S) and I came up with number that gave me a good chance to err on the lower side, so it's my guess that there are at least so many stars. Ooookay? :)
But as you can see, even with this kind of heavy simplification I came up with almost the same number as edpell did by counting the stars. ;)
PS: Your link is fine, but we are talking about the whole universe here, not just about bunch of stars within 10 parsecs of the Sun. :) Pls don't forget, we are on the edge of our Galaxy and the center is 26000 ly (8000 pc) away.
Ramen, you really smacked me with the facts!
Black holes, quasars, dark matter...peace, brother!
Actually something like 85-90% of all stars are red dwarfs, with roughly a tenth the mass of the sun. So the sun is really in roughly the top ten percentile mass wise. The mass limit for stars with a decent amount of metals (to astronomers any elements heavier than Helium are "metals"), the upper mass limit is around 130-150 solar masses. There may be a few dwarf galaxcies around where star making just got started, and the metals haven't built up, then heavier stars (say 200-300 solar masses) are possible.
It looks like 200-500 billion stars per galaxy and 200-500 billion galaxies in the visible universe. The universe is thought to be much bigger than the visible universe, but let's set that aside. So, 4E22 to 2.5E23 stars (forty billion trillion to two hundred fifty billion trillion).
Volume taken up by a grain of sand .5mm by .5mm by .5mm or 1.25E-4 cubic centimeters. Let's use 60,000km of beach at 10 meters wide and 1 meter deep. That is 6E8 cubic meters or 6E14 cubic cm. So, about 5E18 grains of sand. It is true.
On the evolution front, most people can not think abstractly. They can only deal with what they can see. So, they will believe what they are told to believe with respect to evolution.
On the evolution front, most people can not think abstractly. They can only deal with what they can see. So, they will believe what they are told to believe with respect to evolution.
Actually it is religion that gets in the way. The Evangelicals and the Southern Baptists. These good ole boys have all been to the Civil War museum and have seen the small uniforms of the day for the smaller populace. Is diet a mutating factor or not? I lose it there but I would think even if we reverted to the 'poor' diet of the 1860's folks would not shrink, just stop getting taller. What about the North Koreans being 1.5 inches shorter than the South Koreans. They have only been separated for 60 years. Is that enough time for a true mutation and genetic change?
TinFoilHatGuy, you have a point, but the religious tradition of the West is not against abstraction. Just to clarify, the narrowing into air-tight irerrancy of scripture is a relatively modern phenomenon and a minority group within historic Christianity. The Church Fathers saw the opening chapters of Genesis as theological abstraction, understood the internal contradictions therein as a brake on literalism, and interpreted it in ways to better grasp the fullness of the human condition within a wider story about sin and redemption. The problem facing most literalists is that they have not read the words. Anyone who reads the first two chapters of Genesis, and pays attention, will realize that there are not one but two creation stories presented and the chronology is different. If you're seeing scripture as a science manual, then right off the bat, you're getting into immediate trouble - either one story is accurate and the other isn't, or vice versa, such are their contradictions. Of course, they were not written in the first place to be science so it's foolish to apply such a standard to the material today.
Adaptation and mutation are biological facts. The world is very, very old. So is the universe. And it's very, very big. And it's very complex. That's the stuff of science, what once was called "physicks" - or natural philosophy.
The seven day story of creation tells us that there is goodness underlying what we experience in the physical world. "And it was very good." The story of Adam and Eve tells us that corruption lurks beneath the surface of this ideal. The Fall. That's the stuff of theology, what once was called metaphysics - or moral philosophy.
My BA is from Spring Hill College in Mobile, one of two Jesuit institutions in the Southeast. Evolution and the Big Bang sure fit nicely into their religious views. Evolution was taken up by Pope Pius XII.
If the universe pre Big Bang consisted of a supermolecule and time did not exist yet, then maybe 'God' created or even is that supermolecule. I am reminded of Georges Lemaître however. The monsingor sure got mad at Pope Pius XI for suggesting the same thing, so what in the hell do I know?
My BA is from St. Francis Xavier University in Antigonish, Nova Scotia. The name says it all.
The benefit of a Roman Catholic university education, at least a generation ago, was that reason and faith were seen as mutually supportive and not contradictory. Jesuits provided some of the best science minds and many of the others were Jesuit trained. The assumption is God gave you a brain, it is best to use it. Not to use our will to pursue reason is to deny our purpose within creation.
Moral philosophy and natural philosophy are meant to deepen our understanding of the universe. Where and when they fail to do so, the problem lies not with the universe, but with our own observation and deduction. Just as you say, evolution and big bang sure fit nicely into these religious views.
Thats true. Certainly cathlocism made its peace with science quite a long time ago. Its mainly certain fundamentalist types that have made a big stink over evolution. Evolution is problematic because if men evolved from other animals, then man is not such a "special" animal after all.
I must go toil on the beaches picking up tarballs but Spring Hill College has one more distinction. One that few know. Even few of the graduates and students know. Hell, I did not learn it until 10 years after I left.
I have to ask...why is this questioning mind picking up tar balls right now? I read when you started, but I am still curious. Is it by choice or by lack of choices in a fallout economy?.
Thanks
Paulo
Both. I got old.
"3 in 8" - pretty good for the USA.
Like Carl Sagan said, "We are made of star-stuff"
Life is impossible to stop, it's just another way the universe expends its energy as it expands and cools - no different than the formation of the Hydrogen after the bang (or whatever) or the formation of elements in the stars.
First life: The search for the first replicator
RNA was quicker, but DNA more stable...
I wonder what life looks like on a Arsenic-rich planet.
Don't eat the natives.
NAOM
If such a beast (planet) exists? The distribution of elements doesn't change that much in the cosmos. And methods of getting dust to agglorerate into planet sized object, however it works, probably result in broadly similar compositions.
I'm not sure but the mass of a star that went supernova would probably affect the ratios of the elements. Also, the time to creation of solid bodies would probably affect the distribution of those elements. I can think of a few other things that could affect the mix so maybe it is not so homogeneous. Cosmological experts please help.
NAOM
"Life" would be so much more stress free, if more of us realized that Life has 'us' , and 'we' do not have a life. The life in each of us uses 'us' as an agent to keep it going.
The 'us' in each of us is like the official spokesperson, for the community of life in our bodies.(do not forget the 10 Trillion bacteria inside, or the unitednations of 1 Trillion cells that make us up)
possibly another reason why 99.99999 % do not commit suicide once their child rearing duties are done.
If there is a larger collective life, that governs the individual life, maybe it would shape the individual life units to take such an action, to preserve the larger collective life.
All you need is a collective meme change, As someone said somewhere, the 7 billion issue is not only due to a longage in births, but also a shortage of deaths.
About stars, there are a lot of them. Figue a hundred billion per galaxy, and at least 10 billion galaxies. Thats comes up to something like 10 to the 21!
I seem to recall the Buddhists had a concept of a very large number: Take a world (planet), and grind it up into grains of sand. Then sprinkle one grain per world. Now grind those planets into sand, and the total number of sand grains is now a huge number.....
I'm glad it is a little overcast or I would be looking at the stars to see if they are quietly going out.
NAOM
Ah, The 9 Billion Names Of God - what a story that was! Thanks for reminding me NAOM.
Such a little story, too. I read it so long ago. It sticks, doesn't it?
From Mr. Peabody's Not-so-Wayback Machine:
I remember a few posters (can't recall who) making predictions, about this time last year (or a little later, maybe Dec 10), that the World oil supply would see some kind of dramatic or at least rather noticeable drop...there was some predictions of in late Spring of 2011, and some of by Fall 2011.
I was just wondering if anyone has those predictions saved...I thought I did, but I guess I do not.
Speaking of predictions...
Rockman, whither goest Rick-baby? Will he spin off the ropes and Rocky his way to be our next prez?
How about a separate prediction thread like Drumbeat, not regular but just once a year, maybe close to new years day. To bring out the Nostradamus in you :-)
H - Granted I had rather low expectations of Good Hair's performance but he has managed to not even reach that low bar. In retrospec it's amazing how he's held the governership this long. But if you recall my one caveat that could have seperated him from the pack: start laying out the truth to the electorate about our energy situation. As I said then it would have been a risky bet. But, as it turns out, not neary as risky as letting Good Hair join the debates. LOL.
GGH said a few daze ago that he might prefer not to engage in too many more of then thare debates and all...he will prefer to use his war chest to run attack ads on Mittens.
Now we get to listen to the Pizza Godfather prattle on....
“If you don’t have a job and you’re not rich, blame yourself!”
"I don’t have facts to back this up, but..."
“Uzbeki-beki-beki-stan-stan”
"9-9-9" ... "9-0-9"
"This is an example of mixing apples and oranges. The state tax is an apple. We are replacing the current tax code with oranges. So it's not correct to mix apples and oranges.
I didn't like his pizza, and I don't think he will cook up anything better for the country...
The most notable thing about Godfather's Pizza for me is that 2/3ds of their stores near me have closed in the last 10 years.
‘Oil Movements’ says OPEC exports are increasing – a little
Tanker tracker ‘Oil Movements’ says OPEC exports are increasing – that is if you don’t mind their retroactive downward revisions of the prior month. Otherwise, you might say that OPEC exports are about flat. In fact, OPEC exports have been rather steady since August.
Based upon various shipping reports, Libya may now have resumed about 250,000 bpd of exports in the period covered in the latest OM report. That’s down from about 1.35 million bpd of exports at the start of February. However OPEC exports in total are down about 1.25 mbpd since then, so excluding the net drop of 1.1 mbpd from Libya, OPEC exports excluding Libya are down 150,000 bpd in the same time period.
As you may remember, in June OPEC and Saudi Arabia had a ‘dispute’ where KSA said it would unilaterally increase ‘output’. However none of that extra output has showed up in the export totals, as KSA increased its internal oil use due to seasonal needs over the summer months.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-27/opec-to-boost-shipments-by-most...
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-09-29/opec-export-boost-stalls-as-...
This has been doing the rounds of social networks
Someone dropped a flyer in one of the OWS protests
IMO they are pretty stupid if they think that they are making tonnes of money based purely on their IQ and hard work.
Yeah. Funny, scary and sad.
'Vicious'.. I could probably scare him off with a sprig of Poison Ivy. Ahh well..
Reminds me of the old adage; "If you want to hear the sound of divine laughter, tell God your plans."
You'd think he'd be grateful towards taxpayers after being bailed out with taxpayer money instead of threatening to leave him and his buddies alone or the
kittentaxpayer gets it..That poor wall Streeter will be horribly disappointed when he loses his job and goes to take one of those "other" jobs and discovers that they aren't there because Wall Street sucked all the productive money out of the system.
"We get up at 5am & work till 10pm. We’re used to not getting up to pee when we have a position. We don’t take an hour or more for a lunch break. We don’t demand a union."
He'll make a good farm hand.
I was thinking something similar. One of my best friends here in BC, now deceased at 92, was an old hand-logger, then later in life a spar-maker and general hand in a boatyard where manual labour and local materials routinely assembled a working small troller in 2 or 3 weeks (!); later, in "retirement", he built a boat from scratch on the beach at the age of 70. He could fish, can/smoke/dry food for keeping, make bread, fall a tree, yard it to the shore, bark it, all with muscle and minimal hand tools. Only disability (the loss of a leg below the knee) slowed him down, and at 90 he was still picking his own blackberries and doing his own cooking. The worst thing old Malcolm had to say about any human being was "Useless." A couple of years before his death the old man (who lived in a tiny trailer near the boat he could no longer operate safely) gave about half his worldly wealth (which wasn't much) to the local college to start a fund for scholarships for indigent single mothers. He was an extraordinary person, but I know a few more still alive who are cut from the same cloth. People you'd really like to have on your desert island because they are not only strong, resourceful, resolute and deeply skilled, but generous and kind-hearted.
I have also known a few, just a *few*, upper-class banking/finance/real estate type desk workers. And I so have to laugh when I read this threat by the quants to "take the jobs" that the working stiff has been doing all these decades. Most of these people -- I over-generalise but I think I'm not far off the mark -- don't know how to change a tyre on a bicycle. Vicious carnivores? Hardly. Snarling, yapping, overfed, overpetted little lapdogs of the kings of usury is more my view. I wouldn't take any of them along to that desert island, eh? Arrogant and selfish plus useless, what a great combo.
My apologies for the somewhat intemperate tone but that text riled me some.... I know too many people who've worked like horses their whole lives and never got -- or wanted to get -- obscenely rich. They just took satisfaction in being useful. And they shared what little they had. And I'd far rather hang out with them than the 1 percent... so there :-)
I figure the best sign that the world has truly gone to hell is when 1st world countries cut their aid budgets to zero.
-----
diamond engagement rings - makeityourring diamond engagement rings