DR

Texans forced to have rolling black outs. Not from downed power line , but because the wind energy turbines are frozen.

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, turbguy said:

Dumb luck, I guess.

The gangplank does have a drop on the west side of the gangplank, though.  That's the side I reside on.

This area was heavily used by native people in the summers, as revealed by the quantity of arrowhead points, chips, and other evidence that  I find by strolling the one mile trek to my mailbox each day.  The entire Laramie valley is classified as a wetland (even though it receives about 12" of moisture a year).  

Native "places of power" surround me.  Some are quite impressive. Example link below.

Summer life must have been REALLY fine here.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/turbguy/50664887098/

 

The EPA is crazy but how can they declare that area a wetland?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

The recent Texas disaster is causing a problem with the petrochemical industry, and the industries which depend on petrochemicals, including autos and EV autos, computer casings, housing....the oil industry creates so many industries apart from auto and airline fuels. The threatened shutdown of Line 5 by Michigan Green Crusaders could ground the airlines at Detroit International Airport. This is a revolution, not an economic or environmental discussion. It has gone beyond the "talking" phase of operations. Insanity has prevailed in the minds of some revolutionary leaders. They refuse to talk or reason, just panic.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Texas-Freeze-Creates-Global-Plastics-Shortage.html

Edited by Ecocharger
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ronwagn said:

I see no danger in CO2 but if it can be used and not just pumped into the ground that could make sense . 

I can't find the link, but Total has just started capturing CO2 and mixing it with H2 in an algal solution to produce high-protein animal feed. Dunno how much it costs, but sounds promising. 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

 

Mixing H2 with CO or CO2 = Water Gas, also known as Synthesis Gas. This technology has been around almost 200 years. Synthesis gas can be polymorized into Methane, Methanol, Ethanol, Iso Octane, Cetane (Diesel), Plastics etc.

Not new technology. https://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Oil-Gas-Methanol-Economy/dp/3527338039/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3D7ZOYT5GM5IQ&dchild=1&keywords=methanol+economy&qid=1616418868&sprefix=methanol+econo%2Caps%2C160&sr=8-1

Perry K has been making Water Gas Since 1868 for Eli Lilly. Plastic coatings on Pills.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perry_K._Generating_Station#/media/File:Citizens_Energy_Group_Perry_K._Generating_Station_2014.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Wombat said:

I can't find the link, but Total has just started capturing CO2 and mixing it with H2 in an algal solution to produce high-protein animal feed. Dunno how much it costs, but sounds promising. 

They're trying to reduce methane production in multiple stomachs of cows--it's like seaweed, contains something called asparagoptosis, or something like that. Currently, the burps are pure methane and are currently responsible for about 20% of worldwide greenhouse gases. 

Here's an interesting question: Since there is now evidence that the dinosaurs also had multiple stomachs, and since they grew to such giant sizes, was it dinosaur burps that actually wiped out life on earth? 

I doubt that, but when you look at the insane frenzy going on, especially balanced against the calculations of the Norwegian Bjorn Lomborg (one of Time Magazine's 100 most influential people) re' the very small difference in global climate change that EV's and renewables will make, I suppose you have to consider anything to do with methane. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, ronwagn said:

The EPA is crazy but how can they declare that area a wetland?

The surprised me as well.  There's plenty of water in the valley, though, from mountain runoff.  My domestic water well struck water at 40 feet when drilled.  The driller told me that he could not buy a big enough pump to put down the 6" hole that could possibly exhaust the recharge.

It's not the EPA that made the declaration (that I know of), it is Wyoming Fish and Game, and hydrologists from the University of Wyoming.

https://wgfd.wyo.gov/WGFD/media/content/PDF/Habitat/Habitat Information/Wyoming Wetlands Conservation Strategy/Laramie-Plains-Wetlands-Complex.pdf

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Wombat said:

I can't find the link, but Total has just started capturing CO2 and mixing it with H2 in an algal solution to produce high-protein animal feed. Dunno how much it costs, but sounds promising. 

This is still releasing fossil carbon into the atmosphere. It just passes through a chemical process and then a cow. It does not reduce the amount of carbon being converted to CO2 and added to the atmosphere.  It also does not do anything to solve the Texas rolling blackouts.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

This is still releasing fossil carbon into the atmosphere. It just passes through a chemical process and then a cow. It does not reduce the amount of carbon being converted to CO2 and added to the atmosphere.  It also does not do anything to solve the Texas rolling blackouts.

I do like that though process, solve the rolling blackouts. It would not be rocket science, ac/dc power is not overly complex unless one makes it complex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

This is still releasing fossil carbon into the atmosphere. It just passes through a chemical process and then a cow. It does not reduce the amount of carbon being converted to CO2 and added to the atmosphere.  It also does not do anything to solve the Texas rolling blackouts.

It's not going to "solve" anything. This is all for show. 

We are poised on the cusp of sheer madness: a frenzied effort to corner the market on rare earth elements and other hard-to-mine materials that used to be put only into cardiac pacemakers and defibrillators but are now used in smartphones, computers, home devices of all sorts, aircraft sensing systems in small amounts, but in great numbers. Only now, erecting as many massive wind turbines as possible, and building electric trucks and fast cars with thousand-pound batteries, the world will require about 20X the current consumption. 

China has these materials--all of them except cobalt--and they're not afraid of polluting the earth to mine them. They're moving billions of tons of earth each day. But China is also energy-insecure as all get-out, building little low-quality coal-fired utility plants that pollute the earth unimaginably in order to charge all those cars. They have both KSA and Iran in their back-pocket, but since those two countries hate each other because of some quirks in beliefs of a common religion, this is apt to blow up. Then there's Russia, and they truly have nothing of value other than oil and gas and maybe, soon, hydrogen. They're willing to trade.

So China's quest for global hegemony hinges on energy, and in their usual mania to do it denser and quicker than anyone else on the globe, they're going to try to put in enough renewables to overwhelm their wildest needs. In the process, they're going to run the world's greatest test: whether density of windmills and solar panels will change the weather. 

Wyoming is going to likely run this experiment in the U.S.--in order to remain the "Electricity State," the purveyor to California in a pinch, as well as to many other states. I expect to see Wyoming densely covered with windmills. But nothing like China. 

With a weak American presidency showing tatters everywhere in its policies having to do with other countries, China is ready to pounce, as is Russia and maybe even Iran, perhaps in a perverted coalition not terribly unlike WWII. Expect some fireworks. If and when this happens, none of this "one methane molecule here, two over there" nonsense will make two s**ts. There will be a lot of carbon in the air . . . and it will be coming your way.

I just re-read this early-morning missile: it sounds doom and gloom. I'm usually optimistic about the world, but the pandemic has changed everything. At the behest of some clever, exceptionally wealthy men using the hysteria for capitalistic purposes, it has truly telescoped all this "the climate is killing us" into a compact little propaganda machine that is being ratcheted up and played loudly in all quarters. Mr. Trump, for all his warts, served as a counterweight to the madness of the chattering class. But now, while the new administration has labeled Putin "a killer" and its sec of state got his ass chewed by a hostile Chinese emissary in Alaska, we have simultaneously stopped the Keystone Pipeline, leasing on federal lands, and pissed off the Saudis while allowing in hundreds of thousands of immigrants too young to be productive and in need of housing, schooling, and parental guidance. 

Wow!

  • Great Response! 7
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

36 minutes ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

It's not going to "solve" anything. This is all for show. 

We are poised on the cusp of sheer madness: a frenzied effort to corner the market on rare earth elements and other hard-to-mine materials that used to be put only into cardiac pacemakers and defibrillators but are now used in smartphones, computers, home devices of all sorts, aircraft sensing systems in small amounts, but in great numbers. Only now, erecting as many massive wind turbines as possible, and building electric trucks and fast cars with thousand-pound batteries, the world will require about 20X the current consumption. 

China has these materials--all of them except cobalt--and they're not afraid of polluting the earth to mine them. They're moving billions of tons of earth each day. But China is also energy-insecure as all get-out, building little low-quality coal-fired utility plants that pollute the earth unimaginably in order to charge all those cars. They have both KSA and Iran in their back-pocket, but since those two countries hate each other because of some quirks in beliefs of a common religion, this is apt to blow up. Then there's Russia, and they truly have nothing of value other than oil and gas and maybe, soon, hydrogen. They're willing to trade.

So China's quest for global hegemony hinges on energy, and in their usual mania to do it denser and quicker than anyone else on the globe, they're going to try to put in enough renewables to overwhelm their wildest needs. In the process, they're going to run the world's greatest test: whether density of windmills and solar panels will change the weather. 

Wyoming is going to likely run this experiment in the U.S.--in order to remain the "Electricity State," the purveyor to California in a pinch, as well as to many other states. I expect to see Wyoming densely covered with windmills. But nothing like China. 

With a weak American presidency showing tatters everywhere in its policies having to do with other countries, China is ready to pounce, as is Russia and maybe even Iran, perhaps in a perverted coalition not terribly unlike WWII. Expect some fireworks. If and when this happens, none of this "one methane molecule here, two over there" nonsense will make two s**ts. There will be a lot of carbon in the air . . . and it will be coming your way.

I just re-read this early-morning missile: it sounds doom and gloom. I'm usually optimistic about the world, but the pandemic has changed everything. At the behest of some clever, exceptionally wealthy men using the hysteria for capitalistic purposes, it has truly telescoped all this "the climate is killing us" into a compact little propaganda machine that is being ratcheted up and played loudly in all quarters. Mr. Trump, for all his warts, served as a counterweight to the madness of the chattering class. But now, while the new administration has labeled Putin "a killer" and its sec of state got his ass chewed by a hostile Chinese emissary in Alaska, we have simultaneously stopped the Keystone Pipeline, leasing on federal lands, and pissed off the Saudis while allowing in hundreds of thousands of immigrants too young to be productive and in need of housing, schooling, and parental guidance. 

Wow!

Mr Maadoux I would suggest solving the problem would indeed solve the entire controversy.

Stabilizing this grid would come at a cost, from that point one scales up the total cost...averages it out to each consumer and you have the price of paradise.

Cost of LNG vs Green, enough of these intellectual gymanastics. A few days ago I watched Ron Paul as Dr Faucci is your vaccine good or is it not. A profound moment, and still this Faucci character insisted masks are not THEATRE...

Once the money comes out of the personal wallet, political/business agendas leave the building.

 

I have had a few of these moments with analytics, each time they were shown the door their lasts words were...we're almost there we were on the brink of success...my reply was simple. Yes we are your one step away from the door...which I opened and said goodbye

 

Edited by Eyes Wide Open
  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

The recent Texas disaster is causing a problem with the petrochemical industry, and the industries which depend on petrochemicals, including autos and EV autos, computer chips, housing....the oil industry creates so many industries apart from auto and airline fuels. The threatened shutdown of Line 5 by Michigan Green Crusaders could ground the airlines at Detroit International Airport. This is a revolution, not an economic or environmental discussion. It has gone beyond the "talking" phase of operations. Insanity has prevailed in the minds of some revolutionary leaders. They refuse to talk or reason, just panic.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Texas-Freeze-Creates-Global-Plastics-Shortage.html

Capitalism is all about (collective) creative destruction and creation, but that doesn't mean that simultaneous new efficiencies and sources of economic activity can't be found, they are everywhere these days, it depends on how people focus their attention (and play the game of life). 

For example, replacing radiators with radiant heat, the substitution of coal plants with other forms of primary energy generation, or the juxtaposition of incandescent bulbs with diodes were huge wins in being less wasteful (people in general got free lunch), however, there are always winners and losers when there are changes in any status of any quo, and people (especially in the first world) have an irrational fear of loss when a better problem framing is how much win (a infinite dimensional Copernican Revolution) can be created. I think the greatest gift of humanity is our ability to adapt, but we should also heed precautionary tales of maladaptation. 

A secondary question is how do we measure wastefulness or some efficiency and incentivize reductions in "cheating" (I'll describe this as generally, behavior that is not conducive to well being). This is especially true, for example, of many public companies who classically have been incentivized to focus strictly on the short term, for example the current quarterly result, without focusing on the ambient needs of different stakeholders (whether it be their employees, the environment, or future generations).

How does one measure this? Is it an arbitrary numéraire, capacity, power, energy, addition of resilience or adaptability if things go south? These all come with assumptions that people squabble about. Personally, I think it is prudent to design for prevention (risk of ruin) but also maximize risk taking by cross fertilization (where by pollination of competitive cross collaboration is emphasized, the tighter the feedback loop the better). This is especially when the costs of being wrong aren't much and the benefits are extremely high.

Paradoxically, I suspect there will be both substitution of various uses of petrochemical-derived products where there is high fungibility (really a substitution of some processed organic chemicals, for example, many polymers) and a bidding up for (petro)chemical expertise (human capital) as our system of commerce selects out certain pathologies, especially accounting for externalities that became "debt" for future (and sometimes present) generations. This substitution won't be universal, but given what appears to be true for example, with the bioaccumulation of microplastics and endocrine disruption, perhaps it is all in our best interests when there are easy substitutes, for example, in the consumer packaging industry. 

Think about a generalized "immune system" (a equilibrium model, borrowed from statistical physics), which is approximately our laissez-fairish system of capitalism mixed with rational regulations when market failures happen, but can also describe the ecosystem of either economic activity or for example, various natural ecological cycles that are easy to destabilize given their low tolerance to top of the food chain (in practice, human) activity. The collective us (humanity) seems to on average get better at learning from our previous mistakes, but rarely does anything move in a straight line, it's really a zigzag.

  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

17 minutes ago, surrept33 said:

Capitalism is all about (collective) creative destruction and creation, but that doesn't mean that simultaneous new efficiencies and sources of economic activity can't be found, they are everywhere these days, it depends on how people focus their attention (and play the game of life). 

For example, replacing radiators with radiant heat, the substitution of coal plants with other forms of primary energy generation, or the juxtaposition of incandescent bulbs with diodes were huge wins in being less wasteful (people in general got free lunch), however, there are always winners and losers when there are changes in any status of any quo, and people (especially in the first world) have an irrational fear of loss when a better problem framing is how much win (a infinite dimensional Copernican Revolution) can be created. I think the greatest gift of humanity is our ability to adapt, but we should also heed precautionary tales of maladaptation. 

A secondary question is how do we measure wastefulness or some efficiency and incentivize reductions in "cheating" (I'll describe this as generally, behavior that is not conducive to well being). This is especially true, for example, of many public companies who classically have been incentivized to focus strictly on the short term, for example the current quarterly result, without focusing on the ambient needs of different stakeholders (whether it be their employees, the environment, or future generations).

How does one measure this? Is it an arbitrary numéraire, capacity, power, energy, addition of resilience or adaptability if things go south? These all come with assumptions that people squabble about. Personally, I think it is prudent to design for prevention (risk of ruin) but also maximize risk taking by cross fertilization (where by pollination of competitive cross collaboration is emphasized, the tighter the feedback loop the better). This is especially when the costs of being wrong aren't much and the benefits are extremely high.

Paradoxically, I suspect there will be both substitution of various uses of petrochemical-derived products where there is high fungibility (really a substitution of some processed organic chemicals, for example, many polymers) and a bidding up for (petro)chemical expertise (human capital) as our system of commerce selects out certain pathologies, especially accounting for externalities that became "debt" for future (and sometimes present) generations. This substitution won't be universal, but given what appears to be true for example, with the bioaccumulation of microplastics and endocrine disruption, perhaps it is all in our best interests when there are easy substitutes, for example, in the consumer packaging industry. 

Think about a generalized "immune system" (a equilibrium model, borrowed from statistical physics), which is approximately our laissez-fairish system of capitalism mixed with rational regulations when market failures happen, but can also describe the ecosystem of either economic activity or for example, various natural ecological cycles that are easy to destabilize given their low tolerance to top of the food chain (in practice, human) activity. The collective us (humanity) seems to on average get better at learning from our previous mistakes, but rarely does anything move in a straight line, it's really a zigzag.

Could there be a response to the factual story concerning ERCOT's supply problems during the storm here? 

If so, it's well buried within this post (to me, anyway).

When all is said and done, I suspect the damage from this incident to Texas' economy will range upward of $150 Billion.  That will be hard to hide.

 

Edited by turbguy
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

They're trying to reduce methane production in multiple stomachs of cows--it's like seaweed, contains something called asparagoptosis, or something like that. Currently, the burps are pure methane and are currently responsible for about 20% of worldwide greenhouse gases. 

Here's an interesting question: Since there is now evidence that the dinosaurs also had multiple stomachs, and since they grew to such giant sizes, was it dinosaur burps that actually wiped out life on earth? 

I doubt that, but when you look at the insane frenzy going on, especially balanced against the calculations of the Norwegian Bjorn Lomborg (one of Time Magazine's 100 most influential people) re' the very small difference in global climate change that EV's and renewables will make, I suppose you have to consider anything to do with methane. 

The early dinosaurs evolved in an icehouse era and there was a generally large amount of oxygen in the atmosphere, which caused animals and insects to thermoregulate more efficiently. Keep in mind that many insects (especially biomass eating, which flourished during some areas of the planet, for example, the rainforests that became coalbeds) also have methanogens as part of their flora.  

It still seems likely that the the Dinosaurs were wiped out rather quickly (due to loss of food) due to the chain reaction caused by this event:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous–Paleogene_boundary

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Cretaceous–Paleogene_extinction_event_research#21st_century

Keep also in mind that methane is a potent GHG, but also escapes from the atmosphere quickly (unlike CO2 which participates in the biogeochemical more directly)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

1 hour ago, turbguy said:

Could there be a response to the factual story concerning ERCOT's supply problems during the storm here? 

If so, it's well buried within this post (to me, anyway).

When all is said and done, I suspect the damage from this incident to Texas' economy will range upward of $150 Billion.  That will be hard to hide.

 

One question to ask is if the lost economic output (or the humanitarian losses that might be harder to quantify) can be replaced with future economic gains from activity to make the system less prone to future shocks (building in more resilience without too much overcapacity). Same thing with any natural disaster, for example COVID, or hurricanes for example:

https://comptroller.texas.gov/economy/fiscal-notes/2018/special-edition/impact.php

How will that be done? Who knows, but certainly there are lots of blueprints out there since there has been a (planned or forced, for example Puerto Rico after Maria) modernization of grid systems in a lot of places. These disasters are always great opportunities for people who are interested in actual solutions. 

Edited by surrept33
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

48 minutes ago, surrept33 said:

One question to ask is if the lost economic output (or the humanitarian losses that might be harder to quantify) can be replaced with future economic gains from activity to make the system less prone to future shocks (building in more resilience without too much overcapacity). Same thing with any natural disaster, for example COVID, or hurricanes for example:

https://comptroller.texas.gov/economy/fiscal-notes/2018/special-edition/impact.php

How will that be done? Who knows, but certainly there are lots of blueprints out there since there has been a (planned or forced, for example Puerto Rico after Maria) modernization of grid systems in a lot of places. These disasters are always great opportunities for people who are interested in actual solutions. 

Do you REALLY believe the politics or even the "market" will support any blueprint to effectively react to this situation?  Reparations will be a balance to losses, but insurance rates will respond as required to favor the damage costs.

There's still finger-pointing, political distancing,  and heads-rolling going on.

One can only hope.  But then, realize it Texas. Politicians have actually stated that Texas citizens should be willing to die rather than be subjected to Federal regulation.

Perhaps it should be Texas POLITICIANS willing, instead...

 

Edited by turbguy
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

2 hours ago, turbguy said:

 

2 hours ago, turbguy said:
  1 hour ago, surrept33 said:

Capitalism is all about (collective) creative destruction and creation, but that doesn't mean that simultaneous new efficiencies and sources of economic activity can't be found, they are everywhere these days, it depends on how people focus their attention (and play the game of life). 

surrpt33 any idea when capitalism started?  No clue for no education on true origins?  Everything the US has created was from capitalism with our incredible constitutions (think of patents).  Strong survive, weak go by by.  Never taught in higher education, unless taking economics 101?  DEFINITION: Through ownership of private property with free competition, capitalism, has proven over and over to be the most efficient allocation of all the earth's scarce resources...anyone prove me wrong, let it rip.  Drives me nuts most liberal thinkers have no clue about capitalism for never can even think about the cave man coming out to trade...first capitalism.    

Edited by LANDMAN X
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem (R) caved to threats from NCAA and Amazon and tabled the State bill that would have saved women sports from competition from biological males.

Can't run for President of the United States if you are easily deterred by these "woke" organizations.  Another disappointment. 

Too bad .  I thought we could get rid of this pitiful Dem Administration if the Republicans nominated a strong team for 2024.

First Nikki Haley killed her Presidential ambitions by trashing Trump.  

Now Gov Kristi Noem  shows her weakness.  The U.S. can't afford a weak GOP President.  

Democrats can get away with that (ie Biden) . Not GOP.

Is all hope lost ?

Looks like it. 

 

Edited by Roch
  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LANDMAN X said:

surrpt33 any idea when capitalism started?  No clue for no education on true origins?  Everything the US has created was from capitalism with our incredible constitutions (think of patents).  Strong survive, weak go by by.  Never taught in higher education, unless taking economics 101?  DEFINITION: Through ownership of private property with free competition, capitalism, has proven over and over to be the most efficient allocation of all the earth's scarce resources...anyone prove me wrong, let it rip.  Drives me nuts most liberal thinkers have no clue about capitalism for never can even think about the cave man coming out to trade...first capitalism.    

Please recognize that from the USA's beginnings, it's economy was founded on the idea and availability of free land (particularly or those with "connections") and really cheap labor. 

Capitalism played a really weird part...

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

2 hours ago, LANDMAN X said:

surrpt33 any idea when capitalism started?  No clue for no education on true origins?  Everything the US has created was from capitalism with our incredible constitutions (think of patents).  Strong survive, weak go by by.  Never taught in higher education, unless taking economics 101?  DEFINITION: Through ownership of private property with free competition, capitalism, has proven over and over to be the most efficient allocation of all the earth's scarce resources...anyone prove me wrong, let it rip.  Drives me nuts most liberal thinkers have no clue about capitalism for never can even think about the cave man coming out to trade...first capitalism.    

Barter systems and money were the first capitalism, but that's a narrow view of what capitalism is. Something for something (but at some point people developed the organizational chops to band together and communicate about best practices for trading "somethings"). But how do you account for who owes who what? What is scarce and what is not in hindsight?

Are tulips? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania 

Gold? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_treasure_fleet#The_flow_of_Spanish_treasure 

Do you beleive in Hamiltonian or Jefforsonian America? https://www.history.com/news/whose-vision-of-america-won-out-hamiltons-or-jeffersons

Or for example, the vision of the whigs? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whig_Party_(United_States)#Whig_thought

Personally, I think it's a false choice, you can believe in elements of everything. Pick the middle way. Hamilton's vision (particularly of the commons: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commons#Tragedy_of_the_commons) and Jefferson's vision (particularly about private poverty of the individual) both won, but how they were implemented changes dynamically. 

 

Edited by surrept33
  • Like 1
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, turbguy said:

Do you REALLY believe the politics or even the "market" will support any blueprint to effectively react to this situation?  Reparations will be a balance to losses, but insurance rates will respond as required to favor the damage costs.

There's still finger-pointing, political distancing,  and heads-rolling going on.

One can only hope.  But then, realize it Texas. Politicians have actually stated that Texas citizens should be willing to die rather than be subjected to Federal regulation.

Perhaps it should be Texas POLITICIANS willing, instead...

 

I think not doing anything is not an option. Insurance and reinsurance companies, especially casualty companies tend to use a mixture of many different factors (to produce an copula), which at least partially depend on things like what they believe about regulation and oversight. Paradoxically, more of these "rare events" gives these companies more data to build actuarial tables.

I think financially, this will probably benefit people who can deploy energy storage and the surrounding infrastructure, including the financial settlement products. Also lawyers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, surrept33 said:

 

I think financially, this will probably benefit people who can deploy energy storage and the surrounding infrastructure, including the financial settlement products. Also lawyers.

So, Mr. Musk and Wall Street will be the ones to "gain" here.

The Lawyers?  That's a no-brainer...

You are probably right.

There are plenty of "actions" Texas can take, and yet have the no effect on recurrence.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

6 hours ago, surrept33 said:

Capitalism is all about (collective) creative destruction and creation, but that doesn't mean that simultaneous new efficiencies and sources of economic activity can't be found, they are everywhere these days, it depends on how people focus their attention (and play the game of life). 

For example, replacing radiators with radiant heat, the substitution of coal plants with other forms of primary energy generation, or the juxtaposition of incandescent bulbs with diodes were huge wins in being less wasteful (people in general got free lunch), however, there are always winners and losers when there are changes in any status of any quo, and people (especially in the first world) have an irrational fear of loss when a better problem framing is how much win (a infinite dimensional Copernican Revolution) can be created. I think the greatest gift of humanity is our ability to adapt, but we should also heed precautionary tales of maladaptation. 

A secondary question is how do we measure wastefulness or some efficiency and incentivize reductions in "cheating" (I'll describe this as generally, behavior that is not conducive to well being). This is especially true, for example, of many public companies who classically have been incentivized to focus strictly on the short term, for example the current quarterly result, without focusing on the ambient needs of different stakeholders (whether it be their employees, the environment, or future generations).

How does one measure this? Is it an arbitrary numéraire, capacity, power, energy, addition of resilience or adaptability if things go south? These all come with assumptions that people squabble about. Personally, I think it is prudent to design for prevention (risk of ruin) but also maximize risk taking by cross fertilization (where by pollination of competitive cross collaboration is emphasized, the tighter the feedback loop the better). This is especially when the costs of being wrong aren't much and the benefits are extremely high.

Paradoxically, I suspect there will be both substitution of various uses of petrochemical-derived products where there is high fungibility (really a substitution of some processed organic chemicals, for example, many polymers) and a bidding up for (petro)chemical expertise (human capital) as our system of commerce selects out certain pathologies, especially accounting for externalities that became "debt" for future (and sometimes present) generations. This substitution won't be universal, but given what appears to be true for example, with the bioaccumulation of microplastics and endocrine disruption, perhaps it is all in our best interests when there are easy substitutes, for example, in the consumer packaging industry. 

Think about a generalized "immune system" (a equilibrium model, borrowed from statistical physics), which is approximately our laissez-fairish system of capitalism mixed with rational regulations when market failures happen, but can also describe the ecosystem of either economic activity or for example, various natural ecological cycles that are easy to destabilize given their low tolerance to top of the food chain (in practice, human) activity. The collective us (humanity) seems to on average get better at learning from our previous mistakes, but rarely does anything move in a straight line, it's really a zigzag.

We have to do a better job of analyzing the actual costs and benefits of the petrochemical and oil and NG industries. What we are getting now in the media and in political circles is mostly hyperbolic agenda-driven panic-inducing rhetoric. That is not helpful to designing a rational policy to address suspected problems or finding a model to explain the possible outcomes of alternative approaches. Shutting down international airports, which appears to be an initial approach by the Green Crusaders in Michigan, is a panic-driven irrational response. There should be a rational debate and a considered policy creation before we go rushing around in a chaotic and unfocused mania.

Edited by Ecocharger
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, LANDMAN X said:

liberal thinkers

Lost me right there

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Roch said:

South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem (R) caved to threats from NCAA and Amazon and tabled the State bill that would have saved women sports from competition from biological males.

Can't run for President of the United States if you are easily deterred by these "woke" organizations.  Another disappointment. 

Too bad .  I thought we could get rid of this pitiful Dem Administration if the Republicans nominated a strong team for 2024.

First Nikki Haley killed her Presidential ambitions by trashing Trump.  

Now Gov Kristi Noem  shows her weakness.  The U.S. can't afford a weak GOP President.  

Democrats can get away with that (ie Biden) . Not GOP.

Is all hope lost ?

Looks like it. 

 

Nikki Haley outburst was distributing, she had a lot potential..Well let's just say my wish list was blown up when Trump ran with Pence for re-election.  Trump-Haley 2020 would have not only won the 2020 election  but could have very well started a 16 yr dominating party trend..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

19 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

We have to do a better job of analyzing the actual costs and benefits of the petrochemical and oil and NG industries. What we are getting now in the media and in political circles is mostly hyperbolic agenda-driven panic-inducing rhetoric. That is not helpful to designing a rational policy to address suspected problems or finding a model to explain the possible outcomes of alternative approaches. Shutting down international airports, which appears to be an initial approach by the Green Crusaders in Michigan, is a panic-driven irrational response. There should be a rational debate and a considered policy creation before we go rushing around in a chaotic and unfocused mania.

That could not have been better said. This green energy political/business movement needs to form a cohesive strategy. It needs to morph into businesses that would be able to build a green power generation system that is capable of powering a state 24 hours a day. To be able to put fourth bids with costs breakdowns of total operations,reliability and financial accountability.

It is my opinion today these green energy systems are being funded by govt social welfare, literally just thrown into a sysytem to see if they can me made to work. The cost and results have been a epic disaster.

Frankly Green Energy is perhaps a glaring example of socialism at its finest. Mandated by government..financed by government and absolutely no accountability.

I believe as on now the welfare number is around 4 trillion dollars. Today we have rolling blackouts, a state that has suffered a epic calamity and a of course a $ 80000 dollar car that has 300 mile range.

I do believe some place along this utopian dream world concept...We have lost our collective minds. Sense of reasoning, objective outcomes and reasoning have left the building. 

MeanwhileChina is mfg over 80% of the green energy infrastructure needed to build this green energy ....Ohh and building coal fired power plants at rate never seen before FOR THEIR COUNTRY NEEDS!

It brings a new meaning to a phrase that will someday live in infamy.

            LEAD FROM BEHIND.

 

 

China's new coal power plant capacity in 2020 more than three times rest of world's: study

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-coal-idUSKBN2A308U

 

Edited by Eyes Wide Open
  • Great Response! 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.