patrick.net

"Any views on coal gasification?" --Jeffolie

Yes, I recently read a lot about it in "The End of Oil," by Paul Roberts. BTW, I highly recommend this book to anyone who is remotely enjoying this thread.

Anyway, coal gasification is costly, and expending the energy to remove the CO2 and sulpher and what not from the coal certainly decreases the effective energy yield of the coal. But given that the Earth has HUGE amounts of coal in the ground, and given that coal gasification technology will continue to increase the efficiency of the process, it is a good investment to make. So I do expect this "clean coal" technology to increase in popularity in the near future.

Wow, some great posts on alternative NRG --plus Prat & Escape from DC are back! Now all we need is for Jack to pop in agains.

newsfreak,

I have to second Randy H & Peter P on nuclear. Most people's perceptions are based on PAST technology --the old-fashioned light water Three-Mile style reactors. This design is inefficient and (as you mentioned) produces unacceptably large amounts of extremely dangerous and long-lived plutonium isotopes. The latest generations of Fast Breeder Reactors (FBRs --not be be confused with "F@cked Buyers) are much more efficient and --as Randy H pointed out-- can cut radioactive waste by up to 95%. Also, the waste that is produced has a much shorter half-life (hundreds vs. hundreds-of-thousands of years). The whole discussion on using thorium to consume plutonium was also intriguing --it might even be possible someday to dispose of the remaining 5%.

Even so, I don't see next-gen nuclear as a permanent solution, anymore than moving to other fossil stores will be (clean coal, tar sands, etc.). However, every form of "bridging" energy technology buys us more time and brings us closer to long-term sustainable energy. Whether that will ultimately take the form of bio-diesel, wind, wave, solar, fusion or a combination thereof, I don't know. But I wouldn't completely dismiss something as proven and viable as nuclear at this point.

And after X years, (where X=12 to 30), what will you do with the used photovoltaics?

Use them as the next trendy kitchen countertops? :)

FBRs = Furious Bitter Renters? :)

I was always considered the “cheap” one in my family, but I am also in better shape financially than my parents, so I’m ok with being called cheap.

I hear you, SQT. Actually, one of my older brothers is nearly as cheap as I am ;-). Not surprising that we were raised by a Depression baby (our dad), so learned to embrace frugality despite living in the very capital of rampant consumerism (L.A.). The other brother, however, embraced the Dark Side and became the quintessential Boomer --McMansion, bling, trophy wives, Beemers, coke habit , etc. That is, he had all that until his past caught up with him.

I didn't realize you grew up in Oregon. May I ask where, and for how long (planning on moving there)?

"...they have passed a lot of it on to us. It still looks great and I like the fact that it has a family history. They love that some of the first furniture they ever bought is still in the family and being well cared for, so everyone benefits."

This is actually how I ended up with most of my furniture as well --and most of it's solid wood and much better quality than the typical parti-board crap you get from big-box retailers. If you don't have a lot of family around you for this to be an option, nor the budget for Ethan Allen, then like SQT said, there's always Craigslist, the Recycler, Pennysaver, yard sales, etc.

If you insist on buying new/matching, then there are often discount local furniture makers, even in places where you might not expect. For years, there was this place nearby me in Glendale called Furniture Barn that produced tons of great relatively inexpensive oak furniture in Mission (my favorite) and country style. They moved to the SFV, but are still in business as far as I know.

Any views on coal gasification?

It is promising as a mid-term bridging technology, although there is a severe net-energy loss in the fuel cycle which really only makes it viable assuming global adherence to a carbon-limiting regime (like Kyoto). Such regimes are historically never successful because the temptation to cheat/ignore is too great.

That said, there are tremendous coal reserves in the world. My fear is that they will be mostly burned the "old fashioned" way. By the way, coal combustion produces significantly more radioactive waste--most of it directly into the environment--than even the oldest, unsafest nuclear technologies.

Tidal: there are serious environmental impacts from this as well. Any titdal energy farms deployed on a large scale would disrupt wide ecosystems. Further, the cost to maintain these systems is even larger than wind farms, so there is still a net drag on the system cycle.

Solar: solar technologies are viable, now. But there's a catch. For any large-scale, efficient, environmentally safe architecture the solar arrays would need to be orbital, returning the energy to Earth as microwave. The problem here is the astronomical (pun intended) up-front investment necessary. This implies the necessity of building orbital elevators, which make a great read, even if a bit science fictiony (in fairness, we could build these now but for a few problems with material strengths, but this is being solved as we speak). There are great economic arguments for building space elevators, but I fear that we're far from any form of political discipline and international cooperation necessary to pull it off. One of the derivative uses of elevators could be the commercialization of mining in space by automatic mining craft, which could extract precious minerals and even Uranium from large asteroids.

Someone earlier mentioned sails (as in wind) for propulsion of ocean craft. Now it's my turn to say "c'mon". We are still talking about steel-hulled ships with enormous displacements, aren't we? Or are we going back to wooden square-riggers and Cap'n Hook?

One of the derivative uses of elevators could be the commercialization of mining in space by automatic mining craft, which could extract precious minerals and even Uranium from large asteroids.

Even gold may be mined. A gold-laden asteroid may crash (pun intended) the gold market.

Someone earlier mentioned sails (as in wind) for propulsion of ocean craft. Now it’s my turn to say “c’mon”. We are still talking about steel-hulled ships with enormous displacements, aren’t we? Or are we going back to wooden square-riggers and Cap’n Hook?

I think it is possible to use modern sails made of composite material to take adventage of the prevailing pacific wind, although wind should remain as a secondary form of power.

Enormous displacements? No problem, we just need enormous sails.

Would even the venerable Peter P finally agree the economy is not "zero-sum" once we start exploiting exogenous resources?

Enormous displacements? No problem, we just need enormous sails.

Remember, friction from displacement grows as a cubed factor. I'd like to see this tried just because them would be really unbelievably enormous friggin sails (even for composite materials, but then I was the one talking about space-ladders).

Would even the venerable Peter P finally agree the economy is not “zero-sum” once we start exploiting exogenous resources?

Randy, how could I disagree with you on economics? You win.

Remember, friction from displacement grows as a cubed factor. I’d like to see this tried just because them would be really unbelievably enormous friggin sails (even for composite materials, but then I was the one talking about space-ladders).

Perhaps a multi-hull design? If wind can help with 40% of the power one-way, we can save 20% of energy consumption round-trip.

Perhaps a multi-hull design? If wind can help with 40% of the power one-way, we can save 20% of energy consumption round-trip.

Perfect. And a reactor for the remaining 80% so these passenger ships can ferry tourists off to the ocean-space-elevator-platform so they can disembark on their vacation to the orbital hotel of love.

DinOR,

I agree for point of use solutions. I was referring more to plans I've read for tidal farms. The eco-damage would come in the form of light blockage, service vehicle traffic, disruption of breaking waves, and perhaps corrosion/cleaning agents. Wave energy generators are even worse than tidal energy generators.

The most efficient proposal I've read is in the low-tech form of coastal dams and reservoirs, using small-scale hydroelectric techniques. These would piss of environmentalists, though (rightfully so IMO).

If your ships run on wind, and if sleeker, smaller-hulled craft have an advantage (speed, cost, whatever), it is possible that the economics may shift a little bit in favor of a fleet.

We can also have a group of cargo boats controlled by one master boat. This can minimize the need for additional crew members.

As I have noted before, the transpacific fleet does not have panamax concerns.

DC, I am still laughing about your "Pokemon of Death"

Peter - yes - very advanced methodology that I employ!

My wife said that there is a little "Batman" from Jan 19.

http://tinyurl.com/3og25

Oh no, Cramer says "Drop in Gold Only Makes It Shine Brighter". Time to sell.

NOT INVESTMENT ADVICE

“However, I’ve stopped looking at the blogs here because it got too political.”

This is a false statement. I always lie.

SFW, Did you notice the picture of the woman raking leaves? She looks like one pissed off Centex customer/neighbor who closed on her home last month. She’s out $150k now. Thanks Centex.

I got the same impression. :)

Perhaps she should buy more on the dip. :)

All this talk about peak oil, does anybody have a peak oil analogy from the past? Has there been any other ‘necessary’ commodities from the past which became scarce or usage grew exponentially and forced change?

The closest analogy (I can come up with) is the exponential growth of telephones and the change from human operators to electronic switches. Here, human resource could not keep up with the demand and a replacement was found and changes were implemented.

Escaped,

While it's nice to see you posting again, I have to second Devin on the anti-Israel rant. While you may have very good reasons for feeling this way, please keep in mind that not everyone here necessarily agrees with you, nor comes here for political/religious commentary. This is after all, primarily a housing bubble blog. The more stuff related in some way to housing and the less inflammatory political content, the better. Thanks & welcome back.

"Has there been any other ‘necessary’ commodities from the past which became scarce or usage grew exponentially and forced change?" --Devin

Yes, for example: WOOD. Wood was the primary fuel for mankind during the Medeival period in Europe, prior to the discovery of coal. As the Medeival period went on Europe sufferred massive deforestation and the Feudal society sufferred a majory energy crunch for hundreds of years until coal was discovered. This energy shortage to due to wood/forest depletion was actually a major contributing factor to the length of the Dark Ages.

So there you have it…. either let me speak to you or I’ll have you removed from the site. If that isn’t a sign of desparation, I’m not sure what is. Combine with Centrex’s sale and the price of TOL falling and all looks good from where I sit >; )

Similar thing happened to me. I told him that I am waiting for Spring.

If I am anti-nuclear, it is only because I lived near it. Even that fiberglass tub surround won’t last as long as the residue from nuclear power.

The half-life of plutonium is long... but it takes longer to pay off an interest only mortgage.

Why does the woman raking leaves look so exploited? Raking leaves can't be that bad. Like we used to tell clients during the false bottom in tech stocks, "Don't be sore, buy some more"! I can honestly say that I've never created $150,000 hole for someone to dig themsleves out of. There will be NO friends in the crash. Every man for himself, discipline has gone right out the window here! Btw, if a 150K price "correction" isn't a crash what hell is? If I thought (as a builder) that things were going to pick up right where they left off in the fall (with the snow storms in SLO and what not) would I be offering a 150K discount? Damn, it's getting crowded under this bus!

New thread: Monopoly MLS Post-Mortem: What Comes Next?

RandyH, you’ll be happy to know that, contrary to your advice, I’m buying a farm - looking forward to it. Had my fill of Urban and Sub America.

I didn't say you shouldn't take on the farm life. I was only trying to point out that it ain' no utopia, like many doomsayers I hear imply. That said, much of my family still live on farms. I just get annoyed when I hear people wax on about farmlife simplicity when they've obviously never lived it, have no idea what kind of hard work is involved, and have never had the wonderful experience of having over a third of your friends in high school missing various appendages.

I got you beat TOLurker, we don't have a car at all. In the summer months, I commute by bicycle, during the winter by MUNI and BART. My wife uses MUNI and BART, too.

For shopping, we use City Car Share. I guess on those rare times that we have to refill the shared car, that would count as "refilling" the car, but it is about one in six times. On average we must drive about 10 miles a week.

Not counting the 1200 mile trip in the rental car to Southern California and back, of course :-)

We have a baby imminent, so that might change, but my wife is determined to remain carless, so we shall see how it goes.

I am convinced that not having a car makes us much better off financially, since your average car costs $400-500/mo when you factor in depreciation.

We are cheap, too. I find my best furniture on the street, from other people's discards, though my wife turned her nose up at a crib the neighbor was throwing out.

Wow, 180 posts in 3 days on this topic...

I liked the initial blog article, it seems the irrational exuberance of markets, the commodification of human shelter and the rhetoric and hype of RE agents is pretty well universal... at least in free-wheeling, free property market societies with no responsible governance...

Unfortunately, what happens in classical economics theory when the non-renewable resource runs out? Doesn't seem to mention anything about mad scrambles... Remember it will take fuel to make the machines to make the machines in future -- think of the manufacturing transitions that will be required to make electric powered vehicles recharged overnight from nuclear power stations... and yet they're still making SUVs and running Formula 1 Grand Prixs like there's no tomorrow...

Anyone seen the Mad Max films?

Help! re hybrid drive minibus

Just on the concept of commuting, I'm trying to source a hybrid powered minibus for a concept here that I'm pushing with local council and state govt around short range commuting.

Does anyone posting here have any knowledge of a production hybrid powered minibus? There's one or two nibbles on the Internet, but the closest I've come is the work by Evobus in Europe on the Mercedes-Benz Sprinter platform, combined with a developmental diesel-electric drive on the same paltform at Mannheim in Germany. It's hard to get this in a production form at this stage though.

Any pointers? My e-mail is seanreynolds@netspace.net.au

hmm, Peter P, if you have respect for Robert Kiyosaki, perhaps you should read:

http://www.johntreed.com/Kiyosaki.html

(In fact the whole site is worth a look, especially http://www.johntreed.com/Reedgururating.html)

Bear in mind that Kiyosaki has admitted that 'Rich Dad' never actually existed as a person, and there is no inside cover acknowledgement to anyone in that series of books corresponding to whoever Rich Dad was supposed to be. This guy was a property developer/restauranteur/'businessman' apparently (heh) and thus lead a busy life, but checks on Kiyosaki's childhood and his neighbourhood turn up nobody like that. (Sounds more like a drug dealer anyhow with that set of connections...) Further, Kiyosaki's own background is largely manufactured in his books, including the reality of his army service and his business 'success'. So there's not a lot left to admire after all that...

hmm, it's hard being the 183rd post, it's all been said already....

Randy H:

I had a finance teacher who used to say "Theory and practice go hand in hand". The fact of the matter is I speak with business owners in CA every day, and I know what they are borrowing money for. They are getting the hell out of CA as fast as they can. Whether it's relocating to NV, AZ, or outsourcing to China functions that they might have otherwise done here. The China/India option is there first choice, if they can get it.

In particular what I hear over and over again is that the credit bubble is causing lowered hurdle rates and lower returns due to malinvestment--In China. There is capacity being added--in China. What can't be relocated to China is just shifting East frm the BA. Even companies that can't offshore, or ""off-State" are moving to the Central valley because the malinvestment and lowered risk premium prevent them from being competitive in this global environment awash with debt. Like I said, in practice, the US economy and the CA economy are being hollowed out by the lower interest rates, not getting stronger. The theory just doesn't fit the facts. Maybe it's a conundrum.

Second, it is a theory that M&A results in increased efficeincy. I have seen so many deals for business purchases based on synergies and SG&A cost take outs. It just that in practice these roll-ups tend not to work and tend to be based on rosy assumptions. The cynicism that you cite comes from practice in the face of theory. I'll take reality over academics any day of the week. I'm thankful for the ivory tower; I'm not willing to be a prisoner of it.

Finally, on R&D taxation, you got me there. I'm not an accountant. That is not to say that in practice that I have not seen R&D cut during times of low interest rates. The money still has to come from somewhere, regardlees of GAAP. Low interest rates means recession, and recession means cost cutting.

--Deo V