patrick.net

B.A.C.A.H. says

Instinctively, we know we've built our lives around Abundant Cheap Energy. Mainly from fossil fuels

What's wrong with that as long as it's not subsidized and is safe? It's literally a staple of quality of life, taxing it, banning it and making it more expensive will result in lower quality of life.

mell says

What's wrong with that as long as it's not subsidized and is safe? It's literally a staple of quality of life, taxing it, banning it and making it more expensive will result in lower quality of life.

I agree. I also appreciate and am grateful for it.

mell says

I thought BACAH's point was that modern transportation is an amazing bargain

Not transportation, homie: energy.

But yes, there's a large energy component in transportation costs.

Onvacation says

BART was first envisioned as a comprehensive system that would eventually grow to something like this

Right, that didn't happen. You just can't get to Marin or the west part of SF by BART even now, for example.

Regular has dipped back under $5 yesterday in the East Bay.

mell says

Public transportation is only so advanced in Europe because it's not subsidized for the thugs and hobos

It's subsidized for everybody while gasoline/diesel is heavily taxed.

mell says

People fly because hobos can't and crazies will fail at security and you have to have a minimum amount of coherence, money and IDs in your life, i.e. you have to be somewhat stable and not a career criminal.

This is true. Flying is no cheap endeavor, though you're usually flying with people that maybe fly once a year, if that depending on airline. That could be a shit show. I'm yet to punch anyone, but there's basic manners that people just don't understand. Something as simple as not running down the aisle once you're at the gate to get off the plane from row 26. Put this way my bag has shifted in flight many times from the overhead bin on those people. Whoops... lol.

Public transit in America is only going to get worse. People are fleeing cities. They're simply not safe anymore. Local news affiliates out of Chicago are interviewing people that are being robbed at gun point in yuppie areas. Kidnapping and robbed in Wrigleyville 5 times in a week. Again yuppie as fuck (and gay). This is a bold statement, but I'm not sure I'll go to Chicago again besides airports. Maybe for my life. I've already skipped out on shows by my favorite band in Chicago. I'm going to Fort Wayne, IN and might do the Madison, WI show. And I'll drive my V-8 Nissan Armada with no one else in it. I don't need to die or get robbed going to see an event.

WookieMan says

Kidnapping and robbed in Wrigleyville 5 times in a week. Again yuppie as fuck (and gay).

That means the criminal elements and gangs are realizing the easier and more wealthy targets are in the white neighborhoods.

Check this out. Its a video of a black male trying to steal a relatively new large Subaru SUV while its white liberal male owner is on the hood.

https://cwbchicago.com/2022/10/crazy-video-shows-man-riding-on-top-of-an-suv-in-edgewater-and-the-driver-running-away-with-an-ankle-monitor-on-his-leg-witness-says.html

,

ad says

Check this out. Its a video of a black male trying to steal a relatively new large Subaru SUV while its white liberal male owner is on the hood.

This is how liberals are awakened from wokeness.

mell says

If renewables can improve to the point that they could replace em it's fair game

If renewables could produce more energy than it takes to make that infrastructure, over their lifetime, it would be the cheapest energy available.

They can't.

This drives me crazy, because it's so simple. If a solar cell produces 2x the energy over its lifetime than whatever energy was used to make it, everybody would be buying them because it's 1/2 the cost of conventional energy.

This isn't even a back of the napkin calculation. It makes me fucking crazy that ENGINEERS don't realize this, and people in finance, they don't care, they only follow the money. Government gives subsidies, they don't care that it's pointless and wasteful and leading ALL of society into a dead end.

There's the POTENTIAL for renewable energy to work, and we're actually kind of close, but we're not there. Double the lifetime of a solar panel, and we are. Storage is another problem, but not a huge one. How much energy do you need to run your television and lights at night? It might require a change in behavior - you might have to run your laundry during the daytime, your fridge may only cool during the daytime, you may only be able to heat and cool your home during the day. This isn't as horrible as you think, you just need something with high thermal density in your fridge, and in your home.

You can look at old architecture, they were built to store thermal energy. We'd have to build with a little more intelligence.

My father sold building supplies and I grew up in Northern NY. I look at the SHITBOXES built in California, and I have snicker. Homes built here, are basically, trailers. They are tiny, poorly constructed, under-insulated, and not built to last - BUT they have granite counter-tops, you know granite, some of the most common shit stone that exists, that is easily damaged. It's so weird here. Everything here is cheap poorly made garbage, and it's thought to be the top of the line. I wonder what a well built home in Alaska is like?

WookieMan says

but there's basic manners that people just don't understand. Something as simple as not running down the aisle once you're at the gate to get off the plane from row 26. Put this way my bag has shifted in flight many times from the overhead bin on those people. Whoops... lol.

Haha.

I'm the last to board and leave the flight. While simpletons are fighting to get on first (like that matters, the flight takes off when it takes off) so you can do... whatever (are you looking for overhead storage space? Flight attendants will help with that!) and you're then later fighting to get off to save all of 3 minutes, I'm always sitting down wondering why people can't exercise some very trivial thinking.

Why haven't you figured this out yet? Isn't EVERY flight assigned seats by now anyhow?

There's no fucking little gold star for being first on a flight, in fact, you're punished for it as I squeeze by you to get to the window seat after you sat down 5 minutes ago. Why are you so eager to get into the tube first, and so eager to deboard from it first? Fuck the other passengers, let them scramble, and jostle each other about, I just wait.

I have to laugh, why have so few people figured this out? Are you in first class? Be the LAST to board, not the first.

It's bizarre, bunch of lizard brained people competing over no prize. When I exit the plane, I'm with 1/2 dozen people that have figured it out too. I mean, what are you rushing to? If you've checked on luggage, you have to wait for that anyhow, if you're meeting somebody to pick you up, just tell them to come a full 3 minutes later, if you're on a connection, you always have plenty of time (unless you're in Chicago). What's the rush?

Please explain, because I have no idea.

richwicks says

It makes me fucking crazy that ENGINEERS don't realize this

Energy policy is dictated by politicians, not engineers.

zzyzzx says

richwicks says

It makes me fucking crazy that ENGINEERS don't realize this

Energy policy is dictated by politicians, not engineers.

I think it's more likely determined by people in finance. They create chaos in order to profit from it.

Engineering is slow trudge up a hill. Slow and steady and predictable in improvement, but throw a bump in that road, and you can depress good design and elevate bad design, but good design wins in time, but it may take a LOT of time.

I see this in computer chips. Every computer (nearly) is x86, it's crap, and it's ALWAYS been crap, it will certainly be replaced by simpler, and smaller designs, and smaller is important. You can get 8, maybe 16 processors on a chip today for x86? You can get 64 on an ARM design - it runs at 1/2 the speed, but has 4 times the cores. For tasks that require a single step by step process, it's slower, but when is the last time you thought "god-damned, this computer is too slow"? For me, that was 15 years ago, except when I was purposely doing massive parallel computation or was doing something complex like video transcoding, and even then, I just run it in the background, it doesn't really effect my ability to use the computer when it's running, and it takes hours anyhow, and it's not work related, I'm not waiting on results 99% of the time.

For engineering tasks, nearly everything is done in parallel - more processors = more speed for most of my tasks. A single processor is enough for most people, there's just more because.... cheaper to make that model than it is to make a consumer version versus a professional version, and it's a marketing tick.

B.A.C.A.H. says

nstinctively, we know we've built our lives around Abundant Cheap Energy. Mainly from fossil fuels.

It's the reason people like richwicks get all angry, attacking the messenger for saying so

I know we have.

I'm pointing out that energy is cheap, because, well, it's fucking cheap.

We don't have to go to war with the Middle East to attain cheap energy.

We can build thorium reactors, they are EASY to make, they are safe, and thorium is about 1/4 as rare as uranium. It just doesn't allow you to build nuclear bombs.

Despite the FACT that the maniac warmonger fucks of THIS nation won't build them, China will:

https://www.livescience.com/china-creates-new-thorium-reactor.html

They are entirely safe. Basically, it's only active with a neutron source, and if it gets too hot, a plug in reactor will melt, and drain, and the neutron source just irradiates a metal wall. They can't melt down. We've had this technology since the 1960's. You can also power them up and down quickly.

You simply don't understand that energy is abundant, we're experiencing ARTIFICIAL restriction, which is proper, to a certain extent.

I can write a fucking book on this shit if you like. We're not poisoning the atmosphere, you can't charge people $60 a day to go to work without serious consequences, you can't apply Malthusian economics either. When people get more desperate, they have MORE children, not less. This is built into our species. Africa has a fertility rate of 4.2:

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/AFR/africa/fertility-rate

The US?

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/fertility-rate

1.8.

People in hard times produce children for SLAVES. Make life better, and they have less kids. Malthus was born before he knew anything about psychology, much less evolutionary psychology. We're self-regulating. Surprise, we're part of nature.

Energy equals population especially in the first World. They don't want cheap energy they want to reduce population.

richwicks says

There's no fucking little gold star for being first on a flight, in fact, you're punished for it as I squeeze by you to get to the window seat after you sat down 5 minutes ago. Why are you so eager to get into the tube first, and so eager to deboard from it first? Fuck the other passengers, let them scramble, and jostle each other about, I just wait.

So long as you are able to get your carry-on luggage stored somewhere. Problem with boarding last is you often will not get space and then have to check the bag - and checked bags are lost bags. :)

richwicks says

This isn't even a back of the napkin calculation. It makes me fucking crazy that ENGINEERS don't realize this, and people in finance, they don't care, they only follow the money. Government gives subsidies,

Engineers will design, build and deploy stuff that doesn't make economic sense (mainly, constraints are from physics): Concorde SST, Iridium satellite network, Solyndra arrays, French Panama Canal venture, you get it.

It's fun work, it's fascinating work, and it's someone else's money. Maybe I've been one of those myself.

What's not to like?

richwicks says

We don't have to go to war with the Middle East to attain cheap energy.

Yep. That's one we can agree on.

richwicks says

You simply don't understand that energy is abundant,

Oh yes I do understand it's abundant, as I wrote so many times we have abundantly cheap energy. And at multiples of what we're paying now, it'll still be abundant and cheap.

Chill out, man. Try to see around the hate blinders.

B.A.C.A.H. says

Oh yes I do understand it's abundant, as I wrote so many times we have abundantly cheap energy. And at multiples of what we're paying now, it'll still be abundant and cheap.

Again - in order for this to be viable, it would require a RADICAL transformation in society.

Housing would have to be cheaper, people would have to be able to walk to work. The price of food would skyrocket as well. Higher energy creates greater dependency on centralized control, and you know goddamned well what the government will do with that.

Here, you want to reduce energy consumption? Mandate that no vehicle, other than freight, can weigh over 500 lbs and can't exceed capacity of 1000 lbs and they can't be over 3 feet in height from tires to the top of the roof. There, that's 100 mile per gallon car. It's easy to do. We can build these tomorrow, but they would be extremely dangerous to drive on with the current vehicles on the road.

B.A.C.A.H. says

Chill out, man. Try to see around the hate blinders.

You're projecting. I'm explaining the real problems of your silly belief that $1 a mile is affordable to most people. I can tell you don't know any blue collar people that do jobs like sling hash, and check you out at the store. You don't have a clue.

You seem to think "ah, they'll work around it" - no, these people have NO time. I worked at Wendy's when I was 18 to get some extra money for college. Here's what it's like, I knew people who had that as a REAL JOB, they worked not only at Wendy's but like McDonald's as well. The manager would switch up shifts constantly to accommodate them. They were working 50-60 hours a week. This is because overtime pay at a single place is MANDATORY - they could just have worked at Wendy's 10 hours a day for 5 days a week, but that's not legal.

Government creates problems. You have no idea what it's like for the working poor. No clue.

I knew a guy that dropped out of high school who was competing against illegal immigrants for jobs. Of course, he was paid under the table, and he was TERRIFIED he would be caught, because that's jail time for him, but for an illegal, it's inconvenient, but they just move on to another job.

I get irritated by people suggesting solutions and pontificating on what the working class poor can endure. You just don't know and, what, are you 50 or so like me? You've had 1/2 century to figure this out. Liberals at this point PISS ME OFF, because they constantly represent groups they have NEVER talked to or been a part of. If you don't know, fucking learn something about what you're espousing. If you don't you just keep pushing for solutions that HURT the groups that you laughably claim to represent.

richwicks says

I'm explaining the real problems of your silly belief that $1 a mile is affordable to most people.

Please show me the quote where I wrote that.

What I have been writing, is that one dollar's worth of energy is cheap to drive a (modest, 20 mpg) car for one mile, compared to alternatives.

If or when the cost of that amount of energy reaches that point, people will adjust to pay for it. Yes, I agree, for most people the transitions will be painful.

Irichwicks says

You have no idea what it's like for the working poor.

You sure? You know me that well? I've been one of them before, including was homeless (working two part time jobs) for a stretch.

Go ahead and attack the messenger for saying the reality that energy we depend upon is super cheap, or maybe said differently, we depend on super cheap energy.

I'm not the first or only observer who's said so. You can read the blogs of Kunstler, Martenson, (Nicole) Foss, etc.

If the notion gets you angry, you don't need to attack the messenger, calling names like clueless, have no idea, you don't understand, blah blah. Yes I understand the implications, it's the reason I remarked about it. It's a perspective some folks can think about. Or instead they can attack / belittle folks who say so.

Is this how you discuss topics with your kids, your friends, your spouse or partner, whatever?, - lecture them that they are clueless, that they don't know what they're talking about, saying stuff about their personal history that you don't know? You discuss stuff with them like that, or just here on blogging?

https://michaelshellenberger.substack.com/p/why-biden-favors-foreign-over-american (paywall)

Why Biden Favors Foreign Over American Oil

This afternoon President Joe Biden announced the sale of 15 million additional barrels of oil from America’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) and his intention to release more oil this winter. “I have been doing everything in my power to reduce gas prices since Putin's invasion of Ukraine caused these price hikes.”

But what he said is simply not true. Biden has leased less public land and off-shore waters than any president since World War II. He killed the re-opening of a major oil refinery in the U.S. Virgin Islands. And by releasing more oil from the SPR than any president in American history, Biden has repressed private sector investment in oil and gas production. ...

But President Biden's policies are the leading cause of the lack of supply and resulting high prices of oil and gasoline. The U.S. produces more oil in a single day than what it imported from Russia in February. ...

Biden clearly has ulterior motivates. After all, he has never made a similar plea to America’s technology companies, Meta (Facebook), Apple, and Google. Last year, their earnings were $39 billion, $30 billion, and $76 billion, respectively, compared to $23 billion, $21 billion, and $16 billion for Exxon, Shell, and Chevron, respectively. ...

It’s obvious that Democrats are pursuing a long-term strategy to shut down the U.S. oil and gas industry. ...

As such, Biden’s strategy poses real risks for Democrats, which Biden and his aides recognize, and which likely led them to hold today’s news conference. Democrats, in the spring of 2020, killed a proposal by President Donald Trump to replenish the SPR with oil from American producers, not OPEC+ ones, and for $24 a barrel, not the $80 a barrel that the Biden White House promised to OPEC+. When asked about it today, Jean-Pierre waved it away as something from “a different time.”

But Senate Democrats defeated the proposal and later bragged that their party had blocked a “bailout for big oil.” Today, Democrats are still condemning big oil. But they are also asking for nearly three times, $70 a barrel, than what Biden aides reportedly provided the Saudis and OPEC+. As such, the moment is coming soon where when Biden says,. “I have been doing everything in my power to reduce gas prices,” voters and others will have the knowledge and anger to say, “No, you’re not.”

Patrick says

Biden clearly has ulterior motivates.

source: https://fee.org/articles/did-joe-biden-really-say-he-d-close-down-the-oil-industry/

“Would you close down the oil industry?” the president asked.

Biden, normally a disciplined speaker, took the bait.

“I would transition from the oil industry, yes,” Biden said.

This response even seemed to perplex the debate moderator, who asked Biden, “Why would you do that?”

“The oil industry pollutes significantly,” he continued. “It has to be replaced by renewable energy over time.”

Biden’s candor was a bit remarkable. Politicians are renowned for hedging and offering vague responses to straightforward questions. As the Associated Press reports, even the president himself seemed “surprised and pleased by Biden’s comment.”

https://www.csis.org/analysis/biden-makes-sweeping-changes-oil-and-gas-policy

Biden Makes Sweeping Changes to Oil and Gas Policy
January 28, 2021

President Joe Biden has followed through on a campaign pledge by introducing a moratorium on new oil and gas leasing on federal lands and waters.

With nearly 25 percent of U.S. oil and gas production coming from federal lands, the policy shift may have significant implications for future investment and production.

The backlash from oil and gas producing states will be fierce and lawsuits have already begun, but the Biden administration views this policy as a key part of its climate agenda and is unlikely to change course.

The Hill
@thehill
23 Oct 2020
Trump: "Would you close down the oil industry?"

Biden: "I would transition from the oil industry, yes."

Trump: "That's a big statement."

Biden: "That is a big statement."

#Debates2020

Patrick says

Biden: "I would transition from the oil industry, yes."

And the Left arrogantly chastises the CEO of Chevron for saying there is not much incentive for the oil industry to expand production in order to meet demand.

.

Patrick says

The Hill
@thehill
23 Oct 2020
Trump: "Would you close down the oil industry?"

Biden: "I would transition from the oil industry, yes."

Trump: "That's a big statement."

Biden: "That is a big statement."

#Debates2020

Elections, ahem selections, of deliberately evil morons have consequences…

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2022/10/26/biden-created-a-secret-deal-with-saudi-arabia-to-lower-gasoline-prices-ahead-of-midterm-election-leading-to-anger-over-white-house-feeling-double-crossed/

Biden Created a Secret Deal with Saudi Arabia to Lower Gasoline Prices Ahead of Midterm Election, Leading to Anger Over White House Feeling Double-Crossed
October 26, 2022

The extreme vitriol against the recent OPEC+ decision to cut oil output, specifically the extreme Biden anger toward Saudi Arabia, now takes on additional context as the New York Times writes about a secretly negotiated deal between the Kingdom and White House officials that was never executed.

As the Times reveals, over the summer the White House thought their team had negotiated a deal with Saudi Arabia for increased oil production that would have lowered oil and gasoline costs in the U.S, strategically timed before the midterm election.

With that agreement in mind, Joe Biden went to Saudi Arabia a few months ago. However, as the western alliance began putting more pressure on Russia and increased the activity within Ukraine, the Saudi’s aligned with OPEC+ to support Russia via lowered oil outputs. The White House felt double-crossed, hence the fury.

Patrick says

As the Times reveals, over the summer the White House thought their team had negotiated a deal with Saudi Arabia for increased oil production that would have lowered oil and gasoline costs in the U.S, strategically timed before the midterm election.

Seems like the greenies would be upset about increasing oil production. It would less "carbon" to produce the oil at home, rather than in SA and then transport the oil back here.

Patrick says

However, as the western alliance began putting more pressure on Russia and increased the activity within Ukraine, the Saudi’s aligned with OPEC+ to support Russia via lowered oil outputs.

Saudis are not our friends. Never were, never will be. Times like this lay it bare. It's not Potato they stabbed in the back, it's all of us.

Hugh_Mongous says

Saudis are not our friends. Never were, never will be. Times like this lay it bare.

Same with Israel.

HeadSet says

Hugh_Mongous says

Saudis are not our friends. Never were, never will be. Times like this lay it bare.

Same with Israel.

$3.8 billion US taxpayer's yearly foreign assistance to Israel, makes the only country in the world who get it.

As a percent of government expenditures, our foreign aid is tiny. Well, except for Ukraine.

We send aid to many countries.

Here's some of the top ones.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/us-foreign-aid-by-country

https://babylonbee.com/news/biden-sells-alaska-back-to-russia-so-we-can-start-drilling-for-oil-there-again

ANCHORAGE, AK - The deliberate and premeditated invasion of Ukraine by brutal dictator Vladimir Putin has forced the US to reassess the importance of energy independence. With this new resolve, the Biden Administration has taken its first step toward increasing oil production for Americans by selling Alaska back to Russia so we can start drilling for oil there again.

"Folks, nobody wants to ruin America's beautiful Alaskan wilderness with oil trucks and drilling rigs, come on!" said President Biden in response to questions he thought were coming from a house plant in the West Wing. "But I've never had a problem getting oil from Russia, so there you go, go get him."

Jen Psaki praised Biden's brilliance in finding a solution that would prevent an energy crisis while also preventing new drilling on American land. She pointed out succinctly to journalists, "You see, it's not American land anymore; it's Russian land."

Politicians on both sides of the political aisle criticized Biden for selling Alaska without giving them enough time to sneak friends and family onto the boards of newly-relevant Russian oil companies. They also voiced concern that the negotiator handling both the Alaska sale as well as managing drilling permits was Hunter Biden and not their own children.