The Unsustainable Green Transition | Simon Michaux
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 июн 2024
- You can’t go green without going small.
Our fossil-fuelled economy is destabilising the planet. But a renewable economy might not be much better. Simon Michaux and his team at the Geological Survey of Finland have been researching how much minerals and materials we have on earth to build our renewable energy. They’ve found that we simply do not have enough-and mining for those materials would bears a huge environmental cost.
On this episode, Simon walks us through the research, the possible outcomes from calculated energy contraction to collapse, what policymakers are doing with this information, and how the geopolitics of the US-China proxy war could make the green transition impossible for the West.
00:00 Intro
02:25 The Minerals Shortage
06:24 Ideology vs Reality
07:59 The Mining Problem
13:10 The Energy Problem
19:54 Are policy makers listening?
23:34 Renewables are Underperforming
32:40 The Energy Storage Problem
37:53 The Battery Problem
43:20 Engineering society to cope with variable power
48:08 Dangerous dependence on US and China
52:06 Who blew up the Nord Stream pipeline?
58:35 The Currency War
01:00:34 US vs EU
01:06:56 The Resource Balanced Economy
01:15:19 Shaping Reality With Stories
01:19:02 Four Paradigms of Future Society
01:24:39 Shrinking the Technosphere
01:29:32 Who would you like to platform?
🔴 Simon Michaux: www.simonmichaux.com/
🔴 Resource Balanced Economy Policy Brief: www.centrumbalticum.org/files...
🌎 Support Planet: Critical: / planetcritical
🌎 Website: www.planetcritical.com/
🌎 Twitter: / debeaudoir
#politicalcrisis #climatecrisis #socialcrisis #minerals #renewableenergy 
Наука
When my parents saw trouble on the horizon they didn't continue to live beyond their means. They prepared for tighter times. They made do with what they had, they did away with the excesses, they grew more food, they foraged more, the borrowed, repaired, loaned and bought only what we needed. They explained to us why we were tightening belts and our parents, neighbours, our communities included us and our environment in these activities. We all supported each other we, got on our bikes and we made things more sustainable. We sowed solidarity and we reaped hope.
At this point in time, it's madness that everyone isn't living 😒 . 😮 the same way as your parents. Now, wealth has altered society. 😢
Excellent, salutations!
Lucky you, even if you weren't entirely happy with that :)
I had a similar experience.
Some cultures lived that permanently. Its all they knew.
I work too much for all of that....
"information rich" really is an understatement. I went through the almost 1000 pages report, Prof. Michaux published; it's all 100% worked out, but it takes a PhD in Physics to grasp the scale of all of it (which I happen to hold). I AM really impressed by the depth of his work, and as much as I dislike the conclusion, it's absolutely undeniable. Also aout calculating the storage capacity: that actually IS my job, and it all comes out at roughly the same value, you NEED 1/5 of your annual consumption, to cover the shortfall of January to make it to spring (I calculate for Germany, in Finland it's worse). 28 days of storage capacity indeed is too little. I come out at 70 days, no matter how I try to tweak the numbers. And including surge power, not only energy makes everything even more complicated. Feasable, but we are way too late to produce and install all the hardware. I cooperate with a local energy supply company. They see no way, to install, what would be required soon enough. The Hirsch report of 2005 was right: we are way too late, to build a live-boat before the Titanics upper deck meets the water line....
This is complete garbage, and illustrative of why these talking heads wind up so far out in left field. Its a function of garbage in, garbage out. One obviously does NOT need 1/5 of total annual consumption to bridge winter. That is just plainly absurd. We already have years worth of statistics from large-state geographies... particularly Texas and California, from which ACTUAL winter renewables generation and consumption can be compared.
Same thing with storage requirements... nobody is contemplating having 70 days of storage, that's just stupid. When you make calculations that ignore economics, you wind up with nonsense and that is precisely what has happened in your "70 days" number.
There is a balance between renewables generation, energy storage, and base-load generation. The three work off of each other. The more you have one entity, the less you need of the others. There is a basic cost and pollution function to these entities. Renewables are the absolute lowest-cost, then energy-storage, and base-load is the highest cost. What you wind up with is essentially an average of 100% generation from renewables across winter, one week's worth of storage, and no base-load. OR something like 80% generation from renewables, one weeks' worth of storage, and 20% worth of base-load. For example.
it turns out that energy storage, in particular, is far far less expensive than simply its build cost because it does more than just provide energy storage. A lot more. Adding energy storage directly de-congests transmission lines and removes the cost of having to build more in many locales, and it completely removes the need for peaker plants, allowing peaker plants to be decomissioned. For example.
The thing people don't understand about winter is that renewables generation across large geographical areas is actually quite deterministic. So even someone get weeks of storms where they live, that usually is NOT true across an entire state, or an entire region. So over-building renewables for average winter operation actually does work despite the storms as long as there is enough energy storage as a buffer and enough base-load to reduce the amount of energy storage required.
Much of that base-load capability already exists, in fact, and doesn't have to be built. With appropriate energy storage, the base-load that remains can run at 100% sans nominal fossil fuel maintenance regimes (which is usually about 50% of the plants lifetime in maintenance).
It does not require a PhD in Physics to work out any of this. It does not require any physics at all. Just a basic understanding of energy, electricity, storage, and LCOE.
Would you be kind to point out some reports that back the thesis and synthesis of Professor Michaux? I am interested to see the depth of the predicament the humanity is staring at blindly.
I did skim through the same synthesis produced by the Professor, but my non-physical mind could not comprehend the logos.
I predict that in less than the next 15 years wind turbines and solar panels will become obsolete. At that point landfills will be overrun with these behemoths and create a greater environmental disaster than what we have today.
Sure sure another theory
Things get even more tricky when involving ramping up/down the power generation 😅
I love that you ask “what does that mean?”. Your podcast becomes more accessible and understandable. Great work, thanks 😊
Energy storage for renewables.
If the UK goes renewable, then we will need 18,000 gwh of backup energy, to allow for unreliable renewables (probably pumped storage systems). But at present we only have 10 gwh (the Dinorwig plant). .
But remember that Dinorwig was the most expensive power station in the world - because the Greeneys insisted it was built INSUDE a mountain. We need to cost in that missing 17,990 gwh of backup (which will cost £trillions), before saying renewables are cheap. And these backup storage systems will take decades to build. And where will we put them??
And if we run out of electricity and heating during a cold winter anticyclone, there will be no food, water, sew.erage, petrol, transport etc. So we will probably loose hundreds of thousands of people, just in one winter. And we will have ten or twenty of those devastating winters, before these backup systems are completed.
CO2 not primary feedback agent.
Please see my peer review paper on ice ages.
This demonstrates that the primary feedback aged controlling ice ages, is dust on Arctic ice sheets, lowering their albedo.
Strangely, this dust is caused by LOW CO2, which causes CO2 deserts, and therefore lots of dust. Thus it is LOW CO2 that causes interglacial warming.
Modulation of ice ages by dust and albedo.
I cannot post links, but it is:
sciencedirect dot com S1674987116300305
Ralph
after he answerd i still didnt grasp what he was talking about
Why do critics of battery storage for renewable energy confuse Lithium evaporation salt ponds with subsurface mining.
Lithium (Salt) is easily accessible and abundant on the Earths surface.
Oil extraction and coal mining and refining is historically far more destructive to the planet and less efficient than mineral mining for battery storage.
The fossil fuel industry is definitely using extreme and expensive methods to extract oil from under the sea that is not economically sustainable
Every minute of this interview was riveting and enlightening for me. Please invite him back again soon.
Thank you for the ongoing education, Rachel. Your podcasts are among the finest on RUclips.
Energy storage for renewables.
If the UK goes renewable, then we will need 18,000 gwh of backup energy, to allow for unreliable renewables (probably pumped storage systems). But at present we only have 10 gwh (the Dinorwig plant). .
But remember that Dinorwig was the most expensive power station in the world - because the Greeneys insisted it was built INSUDE a mountain. We need to cost in that missing 17,990 gwh of backup (which will cost £trillions), before saying renewables are cheap. And these backup storage systems will take decades to build. And where will we put them??
And if we run out of electricity and heating during a cold winter anticyclone, there will be no food, water, sew.erage, petrol, transport etc. So we will probably loose hundreds of thousands of people, just in one winter. And we will have ten or twenty of those devastating winters, before these backup systems are completed.
CO2 not primary feedback agent.
Please see my peer review paper on ice ages.
This demonstrates that the primary feedback aged controlling ice ages, is dust on Arctic ice sheets, lowering their albedo.
Strangely, this dust is caused by LOW CO2, which causes CO2 deserts, and therefore lots of dust. Thus it is LOW CO2 that causes interglacial warming.
Modulation of ice ages by dust and albedo.
I cannot post links, but it is:
sciencedirect dot com S1674987116300305
Ralph
Do you know?
Simens - maker of wind mills lost money the last 4 quarters, most recently 2 billion. Faulty turbines(?) on their wind mills.
(Reported on Nobody Special Finance) last week. 😮😂
@@kirstinstrand6292Actually the probability is that the wind turbines are too big. Too tall, with a too large propeller.
@@wheel-man5319 out of balance, wishing for greater momentum? Thx!
Re: Total BS. 40:00 Re: EV & Mass Storage Battery Recycling. Sorry, but not mentioning that these sources are 95+% recyclable, plus that those materials are considered “pure,” requiring very little processing aside from their mechanical separation from their containers, plus the fact that their unexpected longevity indicates there will be another 5-10 years before they will be available in usable quantities, plus battery technologies’ advancement at Wright’s Law speeds will extend those timeframes significantly, belies his competencies to comment on this & other matters being discussed. Sure, he knows a lot (as do many of us), but his discourse raises questions as to his ability (or inclination) to synthesize them into other than the ever attractive (& easy) doom & gloom scenarios (his tee logo should’ve clued me). Having heard nothing actually usable here, I’m having none of it & regret having had taken the time to put up with it.
Our Fiat Currency is the PetroDollar - it's tied to energy and genocide. That's why Noam Chomsky predicted the U.S. would invade Iraq again. I wrote a graduate paper based on Chomsky - in 1998 - predicting the U.S. would invade Iraq again. My instructor commented my paper was "too aggressive." - hilarious. So I printed out a couple hundred copies of my paper and passed them out at the University - and I hung a banner on campus, "Stop U.S. Genocide in Iraq" - and the University center of Genocide director walked past me to complain that it was not genocide in Iraq. haha. I got arrested twice to protest against the U.S. led sanctions on Iraq. The Two-Headed Depleted Uranium Babies of Iraq are the future of our renewable economy.
Chomsky. The enabler of the Bosnian genocide. Did the US dig Mass graves in Iraq?
Peter Zeihan had a recent short update where he talked about Germany (and most of Europe) surviving the winter mostly through being lucky with the mild weather. Also, they imported something like half a trillion (dollars? euros?) worth of fossil fuels to replace the usual Russian supplies. If that amount of money had been invested in nuclear power generation instead, they could have completely replaced all their current coal and other power infrastructure with non-polluting power [assuming that you could magically construct a bunch of power plants in under six months fo course]. (Caveat: Zeihan is a bit like ChatGPT, in that he sounds authoritative, but you never know if he is accurate, using hyperbole, or just making up the numbers.)
Haha, nice assessment of Zeihan, I'd concur.
Atomkraft Nein Danke.😊☀️☀️☀️☀️☀️👍
I've never once heard of a nuclear power plant getting built in a years time. And I doubt nuclear is even reliable enough given the fiasco France just went through large parts of its grid basically being shutdown.
And they've just shut down their last three nuclear reactors. Greens can indeed shoot themselves in the foot.
If Zeihan predictions had come tru, we would all be dead 3 times over already.
Making it worse: planned obsolescence manufactured into our current cell phones & computers hastens the use of the rare minerals. Also appliances last half as long as they did 30 years ago. (In the US). I'm curious if it's the same elsewhere. There should be quality/longevity laws here, but there aren't.
Apart from our self righteous freedom to consume evermore sophisticated products the built in obsolescence is a great disservice to society. Anyone remember Ralfh Nader .
If it’s made in China it often doesn’t work the first time you try it. The most usual failure is a rubber seal, and all the rubber seals are garbage.
It is quite technically possible to repair the pipeline, just not possible politically.
We all keep hearing about the necessity to conserve and manage our energy resources. The problem arises when the least among us do the managing. Government is renown for it's incredible inefficiency who worry mostly about bureaucracy expansion and self aggrandizement.
We handed the planet to the Reagan Thatcher junta on a platter, It has failed utterly
That sums it up.
Yep, we can't merely conserve till the last drop. Gov't needs to listen to the people (that are smart enough to understand the concept of EROEI).
Conservation is always a good idea however that is impossible to conserve your way out of a growing shortage
40:00 Re: EV & Mass Storage Battery Recycling. Sorry, but not mentioning that these sources are 95+% recyclable, plus that those materials are considered “pure,” requiring very little processing aside from their mechanical separation from their containers, plus the fact that their unexpected longevity indicates there will be another 5-10 years before they will be available in usable quantities, plus battery technologies’ advancement at Wright’s Law speeds will extend those timeframes significantly, belies his competencies to comment on this & other matters being discussed. Sure, he knows a lot (as do many of us), but his discourse raises questions as to his ability (or inclination) to synthesize them into other than the ever attractive (& easy) doom & gloom scenarios (his tee logo should’ve clued me). Having heard nothing actually usable here, I’m having none of it & regret having had taken the time to put up with it.
Politicians are not followers of what is popular, they are followers of the money.
They aren't followers they are slaves to what the rich tell them to do.
The one inescapable fact is that right now "Solar-wind-battery" installed at an industrial/grid scale is "the cheapest form of power in the history of mankind"!!!
Quote of the video: "Say you have a gold ring on your finger. To mine enough gold for that ring results in three tons of mining waste."
Simon is awesome! Glad Rachel had him back
He apparently doesn't know about the Aerosol Masking Effect! He's fixated on the "economy" without understanding it's from ECOlogy! Hilarious. He's just riding on his Western NeoColonial Coat-tails and he's trying to be all self-righteous about it. Maybe he should adopt a Two-Headed Depleted Uranium Baby to promote his mining career. hilarious.
Energy storage for renewables.
If the UK goes renewable, then we will need 18,000 gwh of backup energy, to allow for unreliable renewables (probably pumped storage systems). But at present we only have 10 gwh (the Dinorwig plant). .
But remember that Dinorwig was the most expensive power station in the world - because the Greeneys insisted it was built INSUDE a mountain. We need to cost in that missing 17,990 gwh of backup (which will cost £trillions), before saying renewables are cheap. And these backup storage systems will take decades to build. And where will we put them??
And if we run out of electricity and heating during a cold winter anticyclone, there will be no food, water, sew.erage, petrol, transport etc. So we will probably loose hundreds of thousands of people, just in one winter. And we will have ten or twenty of those devastating winters, before these backup systems are completed.
CO2 not primary feedback agent.
Please see my peer review paper on ice ages.
This demonstrates that the primary feedback aged controlling ice ages, is dust on Arctic ice sheets, lowering their albedo.
Strangely, this dust is caused by LOW CO2, which causes CO2 deserts, and therefore lots of dust. Thus it is LOW CO2 that causes interglacial warming.
Modulation of ice ages by dust and albedo.
I cannot post links, but it is:
sciencedirect dot com S1674987116300305
Ralph
The guy is an idiot!! Look up Steve Kenion! For an honest perspective!
These two are promoting the fake climate crisis psy-op. There is no independent evidence that there is a climate crisis.
Michaux is speaking mostly nonsense. Where he gets his facts from, one can only imagine !.
1:15:00 YES - finally someone mentioning Permaculture as literally the only viable solution and backed with science and engineering!
Regenerative farming practices combined with industrial scale factory fermentation based processing of plant material to protein is the only viable, sustainable solution to replace the current destructive and unsustainable industrial agriculture system.
Localised small scale food production has shown to be almost 30x more productive than agriculture at scale. Global supply chains can't be addressed by agriculture at scale
Blood protein is higher in vegans than meat eaters so the plant fermentation isn't necessary. Legumes and nuts are enough for a complete protein rich diet
@@tomatao.Have you actually looked at the reality of veganism!
The vegans are malnourished.
Cows are supper efficient protein converting animals. When used in perma culture/ regenerative farming. They additionally improve soil massively. BTW cows provided EFA’s hard to find in any plant. That is ESSENTIAL FATTY ACIDS ❤
Wow, this blows 99.999% of interviews out of the water.
I like this host. She is sharp and knows her stuff, but she is not afraid to ask questions when she doesn't know something Simon talks about. Most hosts pretend and just nod their head when they haven got a clue. So she digs in and gets the answers in lay terms which is good for us. And as for Simon, the guy is a genius, but a practical one, who actually knows how to add up. It's a crying shame (but not surprising) that all the academics in the world couldn't do some simple math and realise we don't have the minerals to do the net zero bullshit. I have seen many of Simons presentations and some of them are staggering. To think it will take 7100 years to mine the vanadium we need for storage batteries, and 9900 years to mine the Lithium for EV batteries is an eye opener.
Love Simon Michaux. Wonderful interview!
So what Mr. Michaux is saying is commodities are still king and as they become more scarce, it will creating hyper-inflation. I appreciate how he describes the problem in real terms. Usually this issue is only spoken theoretical which make it seem long off and far away.
dad's a mining engineer. How Mr Simon describes the processes is the _nice_ version. The _proper_ version. What happens in actual mines is worse. Not extremely worse, but quite worse. It's a very, very toxic process for everyone and everything, involved or not... A mine is a literal wound on the earth, a wound that will never heal :(
Totally agree with the lack of contact the financial world has with reality... Bill Rees talks about the need our stories have in mapping accurately reality and neoliberalism or more generally the stories of our economics don't map onto reality at all...
On the energy transition mining energy requirements i knew this 15 years ago when i did the energy profiles for a number of mines in NSW in Australia ...
It's a shocking story emerging on how little work has been done on the energy transition 😢
Contact with reality? No one wants it. ==> Water Vapor (WV) is a greenhouse gas as potent as CO2 according to theory. On average there is 50 times as much WV in the atmosphere as CO2.
The fact that it is non -persistent is often mentioned. It doesn't have to be. You can AVERAGE (integrate) the effect. There is on AVERAGE 50 times as much.
I have learnt a lot from this talk. Simon is a fascinating guest.. many thanks..
Simon is one of my favorites.
Thank you! Water Vapor (WV) is a greenhouse gas as potent as CO2 according to theory. On average there is 50 times as much WV in the atmosphere as CO2.
The fact that it is non -persistent is often mentioned. It doesn't have to be. You can AVERAGE (integrate) the effect. There is on AVERAGE 50 times as much.
I am from Kenya, and this conversation is incredibly depressing. If the Western world should be preparing to make do with much less, that means that those of us who live in the greater part of the world that is barely making it as it is will be reduced to a wasteland. Most of Africa is barely even out of the tribal warfare stage of evolution! I can guarantee you that the first instinct will be to band back into tribes and go into overdrive raiding mode! The things we still fight over to the death in Africa still have to do with basic resources such as water, livestock, and agricultural land. With our burgeoning populations, it is easy to see how all hell could break loose if all the things you predict come true world-wide. One telling indication is going on right now. As the price of fuel and gas, for cooking, has risen drastically within the last few years, the forests are disappearing even faster than before because the vast majority of people still use firewood just to cook their food. In the cities, the cheapest domestic fuel is charcoal, which is made from hardwoods. The advent of natural gas actually was a source of hope for the environment in Africa because it began to reduce the dependence on firewood for domestic food preparation. You can bet your bottom dollar that the wealthy elites of Africa will not stand for a reduction in their high consumption lifestyles. They will whip up the fear of deprivation in members of their own tribes to raid the resources from other tribes and, by extension, from neighboring countries if need be. Also, the poor people, who are the majority, will not let their children starve while the gameparks are teeming with wildlife. I can see animals being hunted to extinction by people who are just looking to survive. Poaching is already a big problem with trophy animals like rhinos and elephants. No one will be able to stop hungry people from killing the animals for food. I really fear for us in Africa. If the problem had been addressed maybe 20 years ago, maybe a more peaceful transition would have been possible. If the breakdown and unavoidable simplification happens in a short span of time, fear, not rational altruism, and "working together" will rule the day.
1. nuclear power using the thorium cycle
2. No till agriculture
3 Design of products to make recycling simple
4. Use renewable energy for the production of liquid fuels
5. Petroleum and coal for chemical feedstocks
6. Mining city dumps for metals and chemicals from discarded products from petroleum (plastics)
We need to make Thorium work. There's no guarantee that it will. It might do but until then, Uranium. And find out if Uranium extraction from sea water is scaleable. Rather than spending 500 million on another offshore windfarm build an offshore Uranium plant. Greenpeace would go nuts, but the windfarms impact on just the UK's carbon emissions would be negligable, but the Uranium plant potentially could fix our climate problem.
@@colinmacdonald5732 We know that the thorium cycle will work. There was an experimental reactor at Oak Ridge using thorium that ran for approximately 2 years in the 1070s.
The Chinese are about to roll thorium reactors out in a big way, they ‘got’ the idea and ran with it sone time ago, we are continuing to play at it, while our options diminish.
@@freeforester1717 fingers crossed!
🤣🤡
Use it up, wear it out, make it do, or do without
As a olde man said to me if you satisfied with a little you'll always have enough
Amazing interview! Thank you Rachel 💚🌎
In 1980 we prospected for wind power with an anemometer connected to a PET computer. We found the wind completely impractical in the greater Seattle Area. We built a super insulated solar home in 1982 to reduce our energy needs. We were looking at $100/watt photovoltaic panels that did not pencil out. So we never did produce our own energy. In 2023, we could no longer legally cut down enough trees to get the sunshine for a solar home.
The first sentence, which applies to the evolution of organisms undergoing starvation over millennia and not what climate change mitigation requires, tells me about the honesty and integrity of this channel (more accurately, the lack thereof). Thanks for not wasting my time.
"In order to globally reach net zero (eliminate fossil fuels) by 2050, you would need 180 year's worth of the 2019 world production of copper, 380 year's worth of the production of nickel, 1600 year's worth of the production of cobalt, 6700 year's worth of graphite, and 9400 year's worth of lithium. (Associate Research Professor Simon Michaux from Geological Survey of Finland) GTK (published August 20, 2021). The most interesting statistic to me is the amount of lithium needed. With states like California outright banning any car that is not electric by a certain date, it is extremely obvious that that law is impossible, it cannot work. We cannot get there in 7 years."
@@armamentarmedarm1699 This "there" you speak of is non-existent! People love to talk about hypothetical policies before confronting the well-proven natural science facts already. The Guy McPherson Paradox of the Aerosol Masking Effect being twice as bad as previously thought (as per Daniel Rosenfeld - NOTICE this "interview" didn't mention the Aerosol Masking Effect?!) AND the East Siberian Arctic Shelf 1200 gigatons of pressurized methane (also not discussed in this interview) precludes any kind of "there." As Oceanographer Jim Massa has detailed there's over 250 Zettajoules of EXTRA heat in the oceans since 1995 building up - with only 30 zettajoules in the atmosphere as extra heat that's already causing havoc. Just a 5 gigaton release or 'abrupt eruption" is highly likely yet the IPCC ar6 didn't even DISCUSS the ESAS methane! Hilarious. The policy fixation is a total joke without any real discussion of the empirical evidence of doom. The mathematics of civilization is based on exponential growth - since Plato! It's the wrong math and that's the structural drive of "progress" - it's been a scam for a long time. Hilarious.
Absolutely riveting information. I am so happy that Simon mentioned Jacques Fresco and the Venus Project. I just find it frustrating that most people are not even aware of all the effort and thinking that went on to try and give us a new way to live our lives on this beautiful planet. Thank you Simon for being so involved in finding solutions. We really do all need to get involved directly.
Extremely important conversation and I'm glad you produce this video!
Nice to see a genuinely scientific way of looking at the problems!
As minerals and oil becomes more scarce, prices for everything will rise inexorably creating financially inequitable and exclusionary costs for everything else. Income inequities are already a reality, even in "advanced" nations. It will only continue to worsen. We are already living in an unstable "house of cards" that is vulnerable to indiscernable and unpredictable zephyrs of human presumption and hubris.
Especially with El Nino kicking in this summer and an expected 1/2 degree global Celsius increase average - with the center of the continents as the bread baskets to grow food. The 22 million people in Horn of Africa facing extreme food shortage will be nothing compared to what will happen in five years.
I noticed how the privileged have gotten all the choicest positions with very little merit
And yet we still import millions of people into places that we are now thinking will be unsustainable even with the original populations. It is amazing how people are incapable of putting two and two together to get four. They would rather virtue signal and Bury their heads in the sand.
Great conversation. Derrick Jensen, co-author of "Bright Green Lies", would also be a good guest on these issues. Some of his positions are considered pretty radial but he has a lot of good points as this talk confirmes.
Edit: I see Max Wilbert has already been on here, nice
Fabulous upload! As an ex(retired) futurist I was constantly battling, possible doesn't mean needing and doing new technologies! Yes to no/less polluting, even now ( or yesterday) but with common sense. Pleased this uploading is trying to convey this! Please keep doing this and thank you.
Great job performing an in-depth analysis of "going green"!
Love hearing from Simon.
If there was ever an argument to develop lots of nuclear power, this is it!
What we need to understand is that WHAT we do today - is very important and should not be relegated to politicians who look first at reelection, great sounding words.
I have been waiting for that permaculture world to come around my entire adult life-since the 90’s-and it never seems to arrive. It becomes harder to believe in the longer I have to wait.
Best episode yet.
This is a great interview that explains the down falls of so called renewable energy. It would seem plausable that nucleer power is the logical answer to the energy proplem.
How does nuclear solve the problems named here? For example, can we scale up uranium consumption by 50x? And how long will that last?
One of the better discussions on the topic I have watched.
The real question is - just how bad is it that our climate is changing because it has been changing ever since time began.
This was fantastic. Interestingly no mention of nuclear as a less mineral thirsty option to harden a green grid. But, still very good stuff. Especially the return to nature agricultural concepts.
None of these hippies being up nuclear because they KNOW it will immediately take up an insane amount of the load, basically making it worth switching back to fossil fuels for a portion of your energy.
Thorium fuel cycle Small Modular Reactors
My challenge to the "green transition" is to ask people to show me a single man-made item (including food) that was not absolutely dependent on the availability of fossil fuels or their derivatives in thevprocess of manufacturing.
And what will that prove. You can smelt bauxite into Aluminium using hydropower Norway using fossil fuels to transport it. The key is to use less fossil fuels, which engineers seem to be quite good at.
How about an apple from my tree in the garden? Crunch on that one.
@@ambassadorfromreality1125 You need carbon anodes which are made from a particular kind of graphite which comes from coal.
Some day it will be possible, but that day is a few decades in the future...if we all work really hard to make it happen.
@@timothyrussell4445 never used any fertilizer for the apple tree, or any pruning equipment, or any pesticides to deter codlin moth? I'm impressed.
I can honestly say hand on heart I have never used ANY fertilizer on any of the trees, and no pesticides either@@gregvanpaassen
Excellent talk, you've really shown me the complexity of the world's current situation.
In a word: Excellent! Thanks very much.
Wow Rachel! Another corking interview!
There were so many ideas and points that detonated in my consciousness whilst listening to this, that my brain is a bit of a wasteland at the moment, but it's really opened my eyes. Thank you so much for helping me understand our predicament (though, sometimes, I kinda wish I was more akin to the people around me who seem quite able to go about their lives without having the burden of this knowledge weigh them down!).
That's the problem with being red pilled, you can't go back and it's sometimes bloody scary!
Time for a pilot project on a distinct community level. How about say, Long Island, or somewhere similar, where the entire community enrol for a net zero year? It would be educational, surely.
The vast majority of scientists disagree with his assessment. There is plenty of resources to be renewable. The only issue is the time required to extract them.
This was REALLY good. Love the comparisons that we have transferred the digital world to the biosphere...and they are not the same.
Open Veins of Latin America is a good book on mining. Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent is a book written by Uruguayan journalist, writer, and poet Eduardo Galeano, published in 1971, that consists of an analysis of the impact that European settlement, imperialism, and slavery have had in Latin America.
I think they have had enough time to sort themselves out! Can’t keep blaming the culture that has provided all that we now have
@@phillipknechtel9894 Oh so when you say "we" you don't mean the billions of people living on less than $5 a day and in slave wage conditions - and having be bombed and dumped on? You've never been to Pine Ridge reservation I guess? By "we" you don't mean the two-headed depleted uranium babies per chance? hahaha. I love that use of "We" as the Royal misplaced pronoun modifier - very quaint of you! Try googlescholaring "biological annihilation" and see if the we includes you or not. thanks
Brilliant podcast. Many thanks to both of you!💚
It is a very important and sobering contribution that Prof Michaux and the team at the Finnish Geological Survey make in their 1000 pages report. We need more modelling like that. Sure, there may be some assumptions that need to be tested such as the buffer amount. Is it 6 hours (highly unlikely), 48 hours (unlikely), 28 days (likely, especially in northern hemisphere contexts), or 2 months?
It is difficult to believe that the USA, Australia, Europe and to a lesser extent, China, have hitched their energy bandwagons to a “renewable” energy future as opposed to a sustainable energy future WITHOUT detailed modelling of this alternative energy system.
Here in Australia we have just begun to deal with what to do with “dead” Solar panels which are failing, sometimes as early as 8 to 10 years after installation. The ones that aren’t “dead” but are no longer at full efficiency we are exporting to Africa so they can have a second life. What happens to them after that? Landfill? We have been doing the same thing to Africa with our discarded clothing, much of which ends up in African dumps or rivers and eventually the ocean.
There is no such place as “somewhere else” and it is high time we realised that.
All proposed energy system solutions ought to be subject to statutory Life Cycle Assessments using the relevant International Standards Organization Guidelines. Manufacturers should also have to state the the Eneregy Return On Energy Invested (EROI or EROEI) using a new international standard developed for that purpose. Such assessments need to factor in the environmental, social and economic costs of all energy systems from the beginning with mineral and resource extraction to the disposal/recycling.
The problem with much of the current discourse around the energy transition is that it very poorly informed and is driven, in part, by business and vested interests. It takes no account of earth sysytems science and will actually contribute additional greenhouse gases in the short to medium term (10 to 20 years). It will help to drive the global Superorganism further over the nine global planetary boundaries.
Here in Australia, the Australian Energy Market Operator, AEMO, has estimated that the electricity high voltage transmission grid will have to be duplicated to deal with the disparate locations of the diffuse “renewable” electricity generating sources (read wind, solar and pumped storage). That figure mean an extra 10,000kms of high voltage transmission line for Australia. It is possible that rather than a doubling, the high voltage network may need to be increased 3 to 4 fold. That means higher energy costs because someone has to pay. It also means the production of massive quantities of steel, aluminium, and concrete, all of what have production processes that contribute substantially to greenhouse gas emissions, to say nothing of the environmental impacts of all that production and erection and maintenance of the power grid.
And that is for 27,000,000 people, 0.33% of the global population. If that were scaled up globally the impact would be catastrophic.
We need to shift the discourse of all talk of a global energy transition to a new framework. There are alternatives but the hegemony of growth oriented capitalism means that these alternatives are marginalised.
A couple of recent books are worth looking at.
The first is by Assoc Prof Kohei Saito from Japan. His book, SLOW DOWN: HIW DEGROWTH COMMUNISM CAN SAVE THE EARTH, makes a cogent argument for an alternative to growth driven, consumer oriented, resources depleting, environment destroying capitalism.
The second is a book that everyone will need to consult if we remain locked into our current capitalist system. It is HOW EVERYTHING CAN COLLAPSE: A MANUAL FOR OUR TIMES. By Pablo Servigne and Raphael Stevens (2020, French original in 2015). If we continue locked into a growth paradigm, it is inevitable that there will be collapse as Christopher Clugston argues in his latest book, INDUSTRIALISM: OUR COMMITMENT TO IMPERMANENCE (2023).
It is a cause for great concern that our public discourse is so poorly informed. As someone, when asked what he thought was the greatest threat, responded: “THE GLOBALIZATION OF SUPERFICIALITY”.
Surely this is a time for rigorous, well informed critical thinking rather that the group think of being driven by the pedal to the metal, growth oriented, profit driven, economic system that is quite literally devouring the earth, our home that we ought to share with every other creatures and species.
A retired and very frustrated engineer!
Great point on recycling and difficulty collecting. People don't turn in their phones because data is not reliably transferred from old device to new, so people keep their old phone. Better service would help solve recycling collections.
I liked listening to this, I liked the calm and rational approach. It did make me think about the potential of both geothermal and nuclear energy. I can’t imagine we’d let our society collapse as such without thoroughly exploring and developing those energy solutions.
"thoroughly exploring and developing those energy solutions" will only accelerate collapse further. Development is what is destroying the biosphere.
So your vote would be to do what then…? Depopulate the planet?
@@AlanDavidDoaneIs there a solution without technological development that doesn't require forced "population reductions?"
An issue that is forgotten is that enginners that have ideas cannot get funding just to tinker about.There has to be a minimal viable product that investor's will buy into.
Very frustrating for myself that would like to do just that when I am done with the classical startup model.
funding is an artificial constraint that can be removed if absolutely necessary. it should not be the thing that prevents progress
The US has stolen up to 5000 patents based on improving or inventing new energy sources under the guise of national security. Look it up. Something more sinister is happening behind the scenes.
I feel like of all the holes that exist in the 100% renewables energy plan, the one of materials is the most definitive and show stopping. “We just dont have enough stuff on earth to do this” should cut through any discussion instantly (though this fails to land like it should when I point it out). So, so under appreciated, even among renewable skeptics.
I am begining to think it isn't about energy sustainable or unsustainable, its about population control, its politics and murder.
What isn't about sustainable or unsustainable ?
Whatever you mean I think I can tackle one of your points. Which is population control:
Sustainability involves population control, always. They are not mutually exclusive, but necessarily connected. A certain environment can sustain a certain population. If the population goes above the regenerative rate of that environment's resources, then you reach a point at which the population starves and it rapidly drops through violent conflict and famine. IF you are consciously aware of these things, you can then control your population limit before you hit resource limits, and that way you can avoid miserable violent decline in your population, and instead keep it healthy and steady in size.
In short, you either control population consciously to avoid massive suffering, or be blind to resource limits, grow exponentially and then the population will get lowered by nature whether you like it or not, usually in a violent and miserable way.
Ignorant comment. You are so clueless it's beyond repair.
@@mitkoogrozevExcellent reply. Exactly 💯
The best way to stop population growth is increasing quality of life and female education.
@kolbyking2315 I agree but I think the op is a right winger that thinks Simon is a lizard person conspiring to kill everyone.
I love this podcast! And not just because Rachel is beautiful. This interview with Simon Michaux was phenomenal, the best yet. We should all spread the word about what's really happening and what really needs to be done!
Too bad they don't really discuss the Aerosol Masking Effect. A 40% reduction of sulfur pollution from coal heats up Earth another 1 degree Celsius global average. oops!
Don't worry, Bill Gates is going to dim the skies anyway.
Excellent interview.
Thank you.
Great perspective, very informative and thought provoking!!!
It's going to be more like The Flintstones than The Jetsons isn't it?
This was just beyond incredible. Thank you so much.
This is even more so ==> Water Vapor (WV) is a greenhouse gas as potent as CO2 according to theory. On average there is 50 times as much WV in the atmosphere as CO2.
The fact that it is non -persistent is often mentioned. It doesn't have to be. You can AVERAGE (integrate) the effect. There is on AVERAGE 50 times as much.
@@msimon6808 This is true and well known, so what are you trying to tell us? The relationship between water vapor emissions and removals (the higher the temperature, the more water evaporates, the more it rains) is quite robust, almost linear, and the tipping point is so far away that it doesn't matter. None of this is the case with CO2. The current half-life of 120 years for CO2 could well become millennia on a hot Earth, because the relationship between CO2 emission and depletion is *not* linear (but the relationship between CO2 and temperature is).
@@gviehmann Water vapor (WV) is a GHG equal to CO2 according to theory. CO2 at 400 ppm is a great danger. Water vapor at 20,000 ppm (for an equal GHG) is no problem.
The fact that WV is non-persistent is often mentioned. It doesn't have to be. You can AVERAGE (integrate) the effect. There is on AVERAGE 50 times as much.
Non-persistent ==> Definition - only heat trapped by CO2 molecules can evaporate water vapor molecules. The heat water vapor traps doesn't cause water evaporation.
@@msimon6808 I still don't understand what you are trying to say. You will find most of the 0.25% H2O in the atmosphere is in the troposphere, not at high altitudes where it would be much more effective. Nevertheless, there is a theoretical (Clausius-Clapeyron equation) and observed (e.g., doi:10.1038/nature1424) feedback loop between temperature and total water vapor content in the atmosphere.
On a per unit weight basis, the radiative forcing of CO2 is estimated to be about 1000 times greater than the water vapor emitted from ground level by human activities. This means that the Global Warming Potential for water vapor is 0.001 (CO2=1). This is due to the fact that various processes are associated with the formation and effects of this water vapor, such as evaporation (cooling), condensation (warming), cloud formation (cooling), the greenhouse effect by water vapor molecules (warming), whose temperature effects partially cancel each other out.
@@gviehmann CO2 = WV for GHG effect. 400 ppm CO2 is a problem. 20,000 ppm WV is not. I'd call that bunk.
I had to watch this interview 3 times!
Great interview. Very educational and insightful.
1:19:10 I loved the transition paradigms described as "Cornucopia, Pirates, Preppers, and Arcadians" (of which I assume that the latter refers to people striving for a pastoral Utopia). However, keep in mind that there will also be "scavengers", i.e. the hunter-gatherer remnants of people in failed state regions, which have either failed politically or economically or due to some other crisis, possibly including running out of fossil fuels without any backup/transition system in place. These people will fill the traditional role of the barbarian outsiders, picking away at the edges of remaining pockets of civilization, somewhat similar to the Pirates, but with much less organization and reach.
One of the most important issues for any transition is the maintenance of supply chains. High tech items (computers, mobile phones, network routers etc.) require hundreds of different components, each of which has a complex supply chain of many different steps where materials are mined, processed, refined, converted into parts, used as inputs for other parts, and eventually assembled into a final product. Each of these steps requires transportation (usually by sea) between facilities which also require factory machinery sourced from other countries, a stable workforce and economy, never mind the reliable energy supply system. In the case of electronics, we mostly rely on a very complex tapestry of trade and processing of components in many different South-East Asian countries. This is at risk because of both increased shipping costs (if fuel prices rise or fuel is scarce) and politicial issues. Europe and the USA have realized that they are vulnerable in this respect, and are trying to re-shore SOME of that manufacturing capacity, but it will be very hard (and expensive) to try replicate the entire supply chain process in other regions. That is, prices for electronics are likely to be much higher in future.
However, if the Pirates start making raids ANYWHERE, shipping supply chains are at risk of breaking down much faster. The Cornucopians (mostly USA) might intervene to try stop Pirate thefts and incursions, but might not feel any need to do so if they have setup a replacement system already. In this scenario, complex products like computers will not be expensive anymore, they will simply not be available (outside the USA and possibly Europe). Roll this forward for 10-15 years, when all the old gear dies after being heavily used, and you can assume that most of Africa, Russia, and many other poorer parts of Asia and the Middle East will have neither computers, phones, nor internet anymore. They will rapidly be forced into regressive industrialization, ie. revert to pre-1980's level technology. Many will rapidly collapse further into Amish-level technology and social patterns, at least among the survivors. I would imagine that the process would involve a lot of chaos, poverty, and probably civil wars; and remember that communication technologies will be among the first to die. It's hard to see green-tech energy working in that scenario; it's much more likely that coal power would make a come-back, at least in those regions that cannot maintain their trading networks in the face of Pirate (and later Scavenger) incursions.
I would say society has already split into the cornicopians, vikings, and preppers but each of these groups thinks they are arcadians in one way or another...
Yeah he is defining humans based on Nationstates whereas 50% of people in the U.S. age 55 to 65 have ZERO savings for retirement. haha. Hilarious.
His premise that we lack the minerals is absurd on it’s face. The fact is that we already get 1/4 of our energy from non fossil fuels. Another fact is that due to efficiency of electric, we only need to replace 1/3 the rest.
The pure-plug-in vehicle movement is at its end, due to scarcity caused by the anti-mining movement. Wind and solar mining-rigs are produced from fossil fuels, and cannot power their own reproduction. *_Wind and solar are infinitely-expensive, on a sustained basis._* Hydro isn't wind and solar. Stop confusing one with the others.
Norwegian here, ive been pulling my hear out for 10 years now wondering why we wont build nuclier power stations.
I think using atomic energy for baseline infrastructure would be a smart thing. (Mening for electisety not getting electric trucks)
As for why norway wont build nuclier powe stations is becaus of old fear and a bad «sustaineble» culture.
I also have a gripe about us not having a millerary like south korea. That would make it pretty hard for any adverserys to infringe on us…
I would like to see these good people list references in the show notes. That way we could figure out where they’re getting their information from. Blind trust is a very precious commodity. Especially when listening to random Talking Heads on the Internet.
Do your own research.
It's the only way to know for sure.
3 separate sources of information on each subject (minimum)
You could start with the website where he works.
But you know you didn't need me to tell you this did you 😊
Which is exactly the same reply I would give to alarmists. Blind trust in obvious agendas is not for me, so I base my thoughts on my own knowledge and apply logic to what I am hearing compared to what I am seeing and experiencing over 67 years.
🌟Agree totally.
Make alternative cheaper than existing technology.
That" a cheaper way reality "will get big money to adapt cheaper.
@@johnware8850 the most expensive thing you can do is destroy the Earth’s ecosystem. That’s what we’re doing now. Abrupt climate change is causing insurance companies to cancel homeowners insurance along the coast. This abrupt climate change is directly affected by greenhouse gases in the atmosphere due to our burning of fossil fuels.
If you think about it, EVERYTHING ELSE IS CHEAPER! Especially renewable energy.
There is absolutely nothing expensive about renewable energy when you compare it to crop killing drought and flooding, massive destruction of real estate, and infrastructure due to hurricane and fires.
People who want everything cheap are just not thinking hard enough.
All these people still seem locked into the idea that somehow industrial civilisation is viable on any level even as they're explaining how it's not. hahah. Humans are funny.
I refuse to bury 40% of my kids before they turn 5. Most Western people would agree that it's either industrial or nothing.
Simon shows how absolutely vital it is that we develop new materials and new methods that don't require rare (or increasingly rare) metals. Things like sodium-sulfur batteries and iron nitride batteries. The highest-quality copper "ore" is the electronic devices we currently toss into landfills. We need to develop better methods for copper recovery than we currently use, which is third-world scavengers burning the insulation off of scrap wiring.
The thing about electrical storage is that we can start small and gradually add capacity - we don't need to find 200 TW-Hr immediately.
Derrick Jensen has it right, the only way to fix things is to adopt a lower-energy lifestyle for everyone.
He forgets the Doomers who know that there is no solution to near term human extinction.
They know nothing at all wind farms in the ocean kill whales
Yes. It's all hopeless. I failed my grade nine exam.
IT'S SO HARD AND UNFAIR!
(lol.. )
As I watch from the comfort of my home with lights and computer on and I live as spartan as possible. I think this transition is not going to go smoothly
Is the date that this was recorded the same as it was uploaded (3months ago)? Or was this recorded earlier?
Ironic that that Escondido, the mine you can see from space, means “hidden” in English.
Well, I always understood, that 'build back better' means back to carefully go back to a pre-industrial lifestyle. First by simply closing down the electrical grid for private users after sundown, because the nightime-produced wind or battery-stored electricity needs to go for 100% to industry glass-ovens and metal smelts, (because those can not be cooled down over night and those being the only fully recycleable materials).
I don't see that going over well politically
@@michah321 nor do I, but having grown up in an area that was first overrun by Hitler and then the Soviets, I very well know politics will be seen after the moment an extremist government, be it left or right, has caught the majority of votes. Then it will be called 'a necessity', be it for 'the community' or 'the nation', and the first protesters will be sent onto work-houses or labour-camps, whatever name they will go by, and if the scare is not strong enough, the police and the army will have the allowance to round up and shoot rioteers. I don't see any people rioting at that point. Just look at the actual polls, and tell me, 'politics' will be a hindrance. Bert Brecht was right: 'The most stoopid calfs vote for their own butchers.'
Net zero is the modern form of utopia, utopia means no place or nowhere. The trouble with any utopia is that the criteria of the destination is never defined, the reason for this is that people keep striving for it. If the criteria was defined then people would feel they have reached the final destination and stop striving.
Erewhon.
The way to get to NetZero is to use power sources that cost less that carbon power sources. There several sources of such power from renewables to nuclear that are cheaper, once developed, than current carbon power sources.
@@stanleytolle416Why would you want net zero? Net zero is not necessarily a good thing, in fact it can never be achieved and thankfully so.The idea that CO2 is responsible for climate change, or even as they now claim, a faster change, is childishly ridiculous.
@@tdevry really not that hard to achieve net-zero. All the renewables are actually cheaper once fully developed than fossil fuels. The real kicker is nuclear power. Here the the power density of the fuel is a million times that of any fossil fuel. Like the energy return on fossil fuels is at most 20 times for each unit inputted while the energy return for the Duel Fluid reactor being developed in Rwanda is 2000 times each unit inputted of energy. Like it would even be cheaper to produce liquid fuels like hydroxyzine that produce no carbon dioxide when burned than using any fossil fuel. The writing is on the wall, fossil fuels are going bye-bye sooner or later. For it to be sooner to reduce the damage on the climate simply requires decent policy.
@@tdevry if you are a child with no science education maybe CO² causing a climate disaster might seem preposterous. Just maybe you should look to the night sky and look at the bright object called Venus. Yes that brightness is caused by a run away CO² greenhouse condition. Actually Venus should not be hot enough to melt lead but habitable similar to Earth. In the past the sun was cooler so Venus had the same amount of warmth as Earth. What happened? We don't know. So is it your idea to do an experiment of releasing massive amounts of CO² into the atmosphere to see if we can create another Venus?
As Henry Kissinger said "to be an enemy of America is dangerous but to be a friend is fatal"
Green transition is not optional. Human survival is dependent upon this. Admittedly the current economic-political model must change and that is a very significant challenge. Nevertheless, this really isn't optional.
Some people are likely to survive any probable scenario. On the one hand, some places in Africa and the Pacific will become uninhabitable by mid-century. Large parts of Spain may be uninhabitable by the end of the century. On the other hand, some regions will have plenty of time and the conditions to adapt. Most rivers in India are dangerously polluted. Does that mean that all rivers in India are?
Our globalized economy and the health and prosperity of emerging countries are at risk. If China gets into trouble (we got a taste of it with COVID-19 and the floods of 2022), Europe will also be in a serious crisis. Similarly, if the fish stock were to shrink to one-tenth (we are now already at 30% to 40% of the stock of 200 years ago) prices of other protein-rich foods would rise also. To carry on like this will soon become impossible, but mankind has been in dark times before.
What worries me is, that a lot of rich, who are profiting most from the current setup, seem to be willing to go through a time of collapse (or emigrate to Mars like Musk) rather than reform. The willingness to allow human suffering in the future for personal gain today is unethical, but all too common.
Simon is doing some of the most important research on the "renewable" transition from the mining point of view. It takes so much mining to make EV, wind turbines, solar, storage batters and more that it will turn the planet into Mordor and some metals are so scarce we can't even build the first generation (at least not for 2000 to 9900 years for many metals), not to mention the second generation 20-25 years later, the lifespan of wind and solar contraptions (offshore wind just 15 years). Poof, there goes biodiversity! But who cares, climate change is the ONLY CRISIS TO WORRY ABOUT. Ha. Nuclear war, topsoil erosion, aquifer depletion -- who cares? But there is so much money to be made that the greatest destruction of the planet for rare earth, platinum group and other metals is bound to continue, people like Simon are ignored because of that. And also ignored that steel, cement, and mining contribute a large share of greenhouse gases, at least 10% and we're about to mine 37% of the planet to get them. Mordor here we come!
Spoken like a true detractor! Facile and immature, belaying a stunning lack of education. Clearly no idea about biodiversity assuming it is linked to manufacturing of green technology. Farcical! Get an education.
It takes so much mining to make ICE cars, Coal fired power plants, gas turbines, blah blah blah. You are retarded. Your argument is childish and false. Fossil fuels are done. Even mining can be 100% renewable electric.
Total bs. Why are you talking in years ahead scales? Because you are a corporate suck-up. A dick. A Koch-loving money-grabbing duche. if renewable doesn't make headway then all but the monsters will survive.
Well if it isn't "When the trucks stop running!" Alice, you no doubt saw that esla’s Semi just dragged 40 tons 500 miles (800 km) in ONE CHARGE! Truck drivers are required to have a half hour break on their driving shift - by law. There’s even software tracking this. They’ll plug into a Tesla Megacharger for their half hour break, which will give them another 600 km in 30 minutes.
Most countries require the half hour break about 5 to 6 hours in. At 100 km an hour, they’re at about 500 km to 600 km in their drive. Their battery is down to 200 or 300 km. Add 600 km and they’re back to 800 km or 900 km after their break. In many countries that’s further than they’re legally ALLOWED to drive that shift!
But move over Tesla, there’s an Australian system. JANUS! Janus converts any Semi under 10 years old to be a full electric truck. (They require the wiring to be under 10 years.) Janus will carry 100 tons where Tesla only carries 40. Australia has VAST distances with a smaller population, requiring bigger tucks that can carry more per trip as many country towns don’t get regular deliveries.
If you owned a freight company, would you want to buy 2.5 Teslas and hire 2.5 drivers to move the same freight? Or if we’re talking the Australian outback where the Road Trains are king - try 4 or 5 times as many?
100 or 200 tons over thousands of km’s! How do they make the battery last so long? THEY DON’T! This huge battery only lasts 500 km. So what good is it? I personally think it’s BETTER than the Tesla model of the one battery trying to last the whole way - because when you get close to the 600 km charge length of this super-sized battery - you pull in to a warehouse and SWAP THE BATTERY! A young bloke on a forklift switches it over in less than 4 minutes.
What’s charging these batteries? In the cities - a green electric grid - as solar and wind with PHES are now the cheapest form of power in human history and only getting cheaper for a few years yet. Even recalcitrant Australia will be 92% renewables by 2030! It’s just too cheap.
What’s charging in the country - between the big cities? Or in the Outback? SOLAR ON THE WAREHOUSE ROOF! Or a nearby paddock. The extra batteries you charge during the day can get swapped out that night. One of them is probably running the warehouse itself! Solar is so cheap big freight companies will be screaming for this system soon. Oh and the beautiful thing about Janus? Once the standard is up and running it will probably be able to take advantage of all the new battery chemistries on the way - cheaper stuff like aluminium with graphite doping. The drivers might be able to drop from 3 swaps a trip to 2, and maybe one day just 1. The tech is evolving, fast. Big oil move over - big battery is here!
www.januselectric.com.au/
www.smh.com.au/business/companies/entrepreneur-big-trucks-big-savings-big-electric-plans-20220811-p5b91o.html www.januselectric.com.au/
ruclips.net/video/aizG265NeII/видео.html
Also - of COURSE you praise Simon Michaux. Unfortunately he's a hack. ruclips.net/video/pwmygkdoGgc/видео.html&lc=UgwbG1y-qeqG0fIE0354AaABAg
I guess it takes no mining to produce ICE vehicles nor drilling to get the oil. If you want Mordor you should visit the outskirts of Baku.
Michaux is basically constructing much (if not most) of his argument out of one, arbitrary, assumption: according to him the world would need 28 days worth of total energy consumption in storage... well, maybe Finland where I believe he now works does.... That assumption is wrong by nearly an order of magnitude! The consensus is somewhere around 220 TWh of storage is needed... which is perfectly doable with either batteries (not the ones with nickel, lithium or cobalt, but rather chemistries out of exclusively widely abundant elements), or pumped storage (there are sites for perhaps as much as 100 times that amount of storage), or rather a combination of both: batteries for short-term storage (minutes to a few hours, perhaps one day), and pumped-hydro for middle- to long-term storage (days to weeks, even a couple of months). Any other economic energy storage methods will be icing on the cake.
As he starts from a demonstrably false premise, his conclusions are naturally erroneous.
He is like those "experts" who predicted that EVs would account to less than 10% of automobile sales by... 2040!!!
I recommend reading Tesla's Master Plan Part 3, as well as Rethinkx' Energy Report. Both sources have an outstanding record at predicting the trends of this unrolling energy transition!
EVs are a dead end. Mass motoring was a bad idea in the first place. Grow a brain.
@@liamhickey359 Is this affirmation coming from an American to a Swiss?
That would be the ultimate irony!
Yes, I would agree with you, public transport are in most cases much preferable to individual motoring. I use our superb public transportation network every day of the week, and my car basically only on weekends and on vacations. In Switzerland, we can go form the tiniest of towns to anywhere else, in great comfort and safety, and with at least an hourly connection... if not 2, 3 or even 4 times per hour!
BUT, Switzerland is an exception. Many European countries have public transportation that are notoriously lacking... and North America basically has none... save for some Greyhound buses... outside a few of its largest cities.
So, whether a good or bad idea, mass motoring will stay with us for a few more decades. And, during this time, EVs are the "least bad" idea to clean up the atmosphere that we all breathe! Unless you have a genius proposal... which your comment is surprisingly lacking?!
I personally believe that ICE cars will be largely replaced, at least in urban areas, by on-demand autonomous vehicles. An intermediary solution between individual motoring and public transport, which is 5-10x cheaper than the former, and much more flexible than the latter... and which could reduce by 75% the number of vehicles on the streets of cities, and their air pollution by close to 100%! It's no science-fiction... it's starting!
So, have I grown a brain since my last comment?
😉
No. Cars ,EVs etc are a disaster. I've seen car use explode in the last 30 years where I'm at. At least half the adult population has a car. The congestion, the people digging up their front gardens to turn them into car parks, the bad urban planning, , ruined cities , the traffic ruined cities ,towns and the countryside. They are triumph of marketing and little else. I used to drive myself. Gave it up not out of a conscious trying to save the planet piety. Just happened to be between cars and never got around to buying another one. Do not miss them at all
Dont miss the expense and up keep. Dont miss the traffic jams and trying to park them. Have shed that sense of detachment they inculcate. Not having a car made me realise consumerism is almost a religion, something ,you become so unthinkingly accepting of . Cars are a prime example of how consumer culture can so easily brain washus into certain types of " norms" that we would far better off without. The same thing has happened with plastics. An awful lot of people when they find out I dont drive, give me this almost pitying look of incomprehension. It's kind of funny when you think about it.
@@liamhickey359 Two of my four adult sons don’t drive. Not by choice, but because they are visually impaired.
They suffer from the lack of independence that their two brothers have, and can’t wait for autonomous cars to become a reality.
I understand and respect your choice. But it is obviously not the one of the vast majority!
But to sole things, the chances of convincing that majority to your way of living are very precisely ZERO.
So, we have to find another solution, and AUTONOMOUS EVs are that solution… and it is coming… very fast!
Where do you live, may I ask! Certainly not in a US suburbia, where one dies without a car!
@@st-ex8506 sorry but your wrong about cars.. They are the reason why amercan style suburban sprawl is possible. A total waste of land , resources, money and time. It is a manifestation of the effect cheap oil has had on advanced economies for the last 70 years. Can well understand why people dont want the party to stop. But I suspect it may do and of it's own accord sooner or later. I'm not advocating people go around on bicycles or that it is the future. We are immersed in a culture that doesnt encourage people to question how all this affluence is logistically possible into the future. I dont want to go back to old days whatever they happened to be. Neither by the same token do I look to the future with any optimism to a planet dominated by human civilisation. Tara mines: a place not far from where I live. A zinc and lead mine. 400 acre tailings dam full of toxic mud that cant be allowed to dry out. Apparently it was the second largest dam of it's kind in the world. Theres probaly bigger ones now.Mining is a filthy business. Electric vehicles are going to make this problem far worse. It's not " saving" the planet.Meanwhile most people are more worried about finding a parking space outside a Walmart. That about as environmental as it gets for them.
I really want to say thanks for this episode. This was effing brilliant
To make plastic you need oil, to make glass you need sand, to make cardboard you need trees. You need a lot of energy to make aluminium, a lot of aluminium plants have their own power stations. I wonder if the money spent on renewables would be better spend on can deposit schemes, giving people money to return aluminium cans. This would save a lot of energy, as in producing new aluminium.
It is estimated that 95 percent of aluminum cans are recycled in Western nations.
Simon remained stable for two thirds of the conversation, but then spun off into paranoia and crazy theories that are outside his core expertise again. I enjoyed the less paranoid parts.
What crazy theories?
I agree. He leaped from the cliff somewhat. Especially on food production. We create more food on less acreage every year and everywhere in the world
His understanding of the US/Europe war capacity and collaboration is way off. USA is burning through $5 billion a month to protect europe by paying for most of the war. Europe has been technically insolvent for a decade and would have being fiscally sunk if the US had not gone into debt to pay for over 70% of NATO for the last 70 years. Europe has basically been getting a free ride. The only European country arming itself at an accelerated rate is Poland. Germany and france have been burying their heads in the sand. Time to pay the piper.
Great interview. The final part with the 4 scenarios is similar to Holmgren's FUTURE SCENARIOS. In my opinion our western species will split and all four scenarios will be populated. Local governments (particularly rural shires) will lead the preper societies. Basically the essentials for the future are water, food, shelter and community. We have examples of how we can live succesfully in our recent past. Local councils or entrepreneurs need to find land and encourage simpler living societies. The high rise energy dependant cities will fail.
Yes, lets all get back to being cavemen
@@timothyrussell4445 It won't be a choice. Resources will run out (they are finite!) and our economic system (credit/growth) is too entrenched and self interested to react in time. Our policy makers are puppets of that economic system so are not doing anything. This is happening now. We have enjoyed the best of what our unsustainable civilisation can offer. People are intrinsically selfish and greedy. It's downhill from here. Just as the past was a very different place, so will be the future.
Yes, I pretty much agree. I do think though that humanity really can get its act together if the political conditions are right. At the moment we're subsumed in populist nonsense which people are buying into even though it's not in their interests, and global problems call for global solutions. I think we're smart enough, but we're also stupid enough not to, and time is running out. @@davidpalk5010
I think in terms of Water-Energy-Food nexus. These 3 are interdependent components
@@mohd.saifullahmajid6029 They always were, but now our civilisation is totally dependednt on highly vulnerable systems such as the power grid and the internet, and the finite mineral resources which make them possible, and those mineral resources are dependent upon the vulnerable systems. Also, global systems are more vulnerable than territorial or local ones, as there is less compartmentalisation or isolation to provide protections. The panenmic is a perfect example of this. Problems which once would have been locally contained are now global. The Ukranian war is another example. Restricted gas and grain supplies from one region will have economic and political effects right around the world.
Much of this was a trip down memory lane, for example, I think Dinorwig pumped strorage was being planned when I was at university.
I studied geology, oceanography, and materials processing, and worked in mineral processing, including calculating economic feasability, and other calculations mentioned. That was before Simon Michaux was born, so this subject has been troubling me for well over 40 years, and each year the problem becomes more urgent and more intractable. If we had started the transition to a low carbon economy with associated changes in lifestyle 40 years ago, we would have more of a chance, but that has been prevented by fossil fuel interests and their client media and politicians. Simon is certainly right about all of us contributing to the problem, and I admit to being a total hypocrite, but we are all trapped in a system over which we have little control.
I recognise the problem in Australia with its "she'll be right" culture. I
I knew a little about resource wars, but I learned a lot of new and useful stuff from this.
Re transport: I was born in a fairly sparsely populated area of south east England where the nearest bus stop was a mile away, so we walked or cycled almost everywhere. Even before I started school, I was used to walking anywhere within about a three mile radius of home. That would be unthinkable for most people today, but we haven't changed anatomically or physiologically so it is still possible.
The structure of society proposed is similar to what I've always understood as political anarchism. So much food for thought. Thank you.
Dinorwic was built in the days of the centralised CEGB that could theoretically manage the whole electrical system as it was all theirs. Now everything is supposedly market driven and balkanised, but it isn't really as government always interferes eg with net zero. Dinorwic was built for peak lopping ie covering the power shortfall during short periods when demand exceeded generation eg believe it or not when a popular TV program had an advert break and everyone turned on their electric kettles at the same time or when everyone got home from work and fired up the electric cookers. Remember that back then there was only two or three TV channels in the UK and therefore this was easily capable of happening.
The point is that it was never intended to supply for more than say an hour at a time if that. It was never intended to last for hours or days. And the water was returned to the top using the cheap excess power at night when less is used. But that assumes that cheap power will be available, which can't be counted on without dispatchable nuclear or fossil fuel power.
as a geologist who has spent a career in energy, from development of utility wind and solar farms to trading energy for large hydropower incumbents (who are proposing pumped hydro) to developing retail offerings, to even dropping solution into clouds via aircraft to improve yield over hydropower assets (yes im a real llfe chem trailer) to now running my own small business that specialises in off grid solar ive gotta say there are massive errors and fundamental misunderstandings here. the reason no one has critiqued him is because im guessing his audiences are twits in policy with arts degrees and no real world experience. im up to 44 mins and i have counted something like 10 errors/clear examples of fundamental misunderstandings of power grids. once he started talking about replicating power grids for different purposes i knew he really has no idea about how electricity works in an intermittent grid. weird really because you can look at australia where he is from daily and see 30% RE daily and in SA over 110% regularly. i couldnt watch any more after that. im not sure i agree with his malthusian/peak oil type theories on resources either. we had a shirt at university for our year that said "earth first we will strip mine the other planets later" sorry simon you seem like a good guy and there is some good information here but the energy part is not it. sorry mate.
I have looked at Simons work from the perspective of my industry (rail) where I have some knowledge, and while it's a great piece of work that raises some fair challenges, I found it a bit simplistic on the detail to be honest. The devil is in the detail.
Each sector is a whole paper in of itself really, or we cannot capture the whole picture effectively. I'd like to see Simon collaborate with experts in each sector to develop his ideas further and get them out of a minerals silo.
I agree with the principle of starting from a baseline of now rather than including aspirational technologies too early. I look forward to a more detailed and collaborative future incarnation.
In terms of supporting an intermittent grid, are we talking about installing power walls in all buildings and community storage blocks? It sounds like a great idea in principle and would seem resilient in terms of energy, but could it suffer from the same resourcing limitations? What are the mineral requirements for this?
I like Daniel Schmachtenberger's principle: The solution to all of the problems is all of the solutions.
This is why I feel that, in focusing on emphasising the limitations of existing wind and solar, Simon may be missing some detail on the advances in power returns of new developments coming online today, and those that started producing a decade ago upon which much of the historical data will be based. Technology is moving fast, so I appreciate it's hard for one person or a small team to keep up with it all.
There is potentially much that is omitted from the report that could reasonably be included.
I suggest considering a pathway approach so that policy makers that are presented with the work can consider the different alternatives available to them and make fair comparisons on pathway options they might be able to take.
Perhaps the way to go is building a dynamic model with all the data in there so they can try patching different options into their own models. This might help translate it for different countries/communities that may have differing resource availability. Power BI would do that easy enough once the data is in.
You are right when you quote “all of the solutions “ and you are double right when you recognise that the data people refer to is often decades out of date.
Talking about cobalt, at least it can be recycled if used in batteries, however the largest user of cobalt is in the refinement of petrol, that's a waste.
ther called smart citys, and i predict ,that muia or the that just burned in hawai will be the one built there.
Rail is always subsidised, it can only exist where other sources support it.
Exactly, his ideas are all nonsense and any real expert would laugh him out of the room
We really do live in a yellow submarine.
Great interview, thank you.
Thank you Rachel and Simon. A useful discussion. Rachel, thanks for jumping in to ask Simon to explain certain ideas. Simon, thanks for your understandable explanations. It is interesting to note that Simon has since decided to partner with Venus Project to try a proof of concept project in South America.
1:02:31 It's rather disingenuous to blame the Americans for Germany (and the rest of Europe) suddenly not being able to use Russian fossil fuel. Merkel should take most of the credit for that, i.e. in making Germany dependent on an autocrat with delusions of grandeur; but Putin's war in Ukraine has also united the EU behind the concept that invading another country is simply not cricket. This is one of the very few times in the past three decades or so when there has been such strong agreement in Europe, and the issue at hand pretty much requires cutting Russia off from EU markets.
(I disagree strongly with Simon's statements about Europe being too weak to fight the Russians. The general consensus in NATO is that NATO forces would carve a path through to Moscow in a under a month at most if there were to be any direct conflict between Russia and NATO, triggering a nuclear war. This is why the war MUST stay contained to Ukraine, and Russia MUST lose in Ukraine. Simon is also incorrect about Ukraine's armored vehicle fleet. Ukraine has lost most of its original fleet of tanks, IFV's and APCs, but captured so much from the Russians that they actually have a larger operational fleet of armored vehicles now than they started with. The same is not true of fighter jets though, where the Ukrainian airforce has been largely destroyed.)
To be fair, most "Western" countries also have just realized (since Covid began) that the neo-liberal trade paradigm and outsourcing of manufacturing to the far East has also made us all totally dependent on Chinese industry. The problem is not just maintaining the goodwill of China as a trade partner, but also that China's own stability is also very fragile and it might face economic collapse for several different reasons.
I take Simón seriously, but not literally.
Eye opening stuff regarding US fidget involvement in Nordic gas pipe blast! Great Podcast guys and great to see Simon is very Busey giving other podcast Energy Blindness preparations
Aotearoa NZ 🕊🌏💪💖
The Russians blew up nord pipeline.
@@JDAbelRNin your head mate
Always ask yourself the question "Who benefits from this?" and you have your most likely culprit.
@@JDAbelRNbrandon said he'd do it...
CIA contract.
@@wheel-man5319go Brandon,,,4 more years,,, don the con 4-8 years
Great convo ... very relevant and topicical , the capacity of the buffer is unknown?
Shouldn't someone be working this out? Or have worked it out already?
Brilliant explanation of the situation we’ve created on our planet and for ourselves.
we fill the profit estimates then we end up with hugev dams of poisoned water so the government does not want to participate in the cleanup but the government has takenthe premium tax oon minerals so when the nmini ng company goes under we have tob clean our nest therefore wewill pay for our land
Saying "we" is a victim blaming. It's the governments and ruling class as a whole who did it.
no mention of bicycles for transport? Bicycles are the most efficient transport - good for health as well. I rode a bicycle 10 miles a day for 10 years even in the winter in Minnesota while I dumpster dived for food. 40% of food is thrown out - so I had plenty of free food. The cops thought I was homeless but I had a part-time job at an environmental nonprofit so I had time to read one scholarly book a day.
Works great with 3 or 4 kids and old people.
@@edsteadham4085 to be honest the Asian traditional culture maintains better fitness at all ages. Not so much anymore I suppose.
According to wikipedia electric kickscooters and velomobiles are more energy efficient than bicycles, former because electric motor is more efficient (ca 80 percent) propulsion source than human power (ca 25 percent efficiency). Latter are more efficient because of aerodynamic drag losses are smaller compared to safety bike.
@@elchupacabra1666 efficiency needs to be defined in terms of the thermodynamics of photon radiation, as per the 2022 Physics Today article on the thermodynamics of global warming. Therefore is all of modern industrial civilization shut down all CO2-equivalent emissions yesterday, there would be a 1 degree Celsius increase global average in heating due to the Aerosol Masking Effect - actually it would be worse. Daniel Rosenberg's Aerosol Masking Effect research discovered that it's twice as bad as previously thought with a 40% decrease in sulfur pollution heating earth 1 degree Celsius global average. As Tim Garrett emphasizes civilization is a heat energy no matter what. This goes back to the wrong mathematics as physics Professor Albert Bartlett emphasized with the SAME lecture given in person over 1000 times as his career - the "exponential function" math is the true cause of the ecological crisis. The exponential function is the inverse of the logarithmic function from symmetric spatial irrational magnitude math from the wrong music theory as math Professor Luigi Borzacchini points out. The correct music theory and mathematics is called "noncommutativity" as Alain Connes (Fields Medal in math) emphasizes along with Sir Roger Penrose (his latest Palatial Twistor model relies on noncommutativity and gravitational entropy from asymmetric time) - and his collaborator Professor Basil J. Hiley who worked with Bohm - and I have corresponded with Hiley numerous times in the past five years.
So now Mother Nature is taking revenge with positive feedback acceleration as there's a 1200 gigaton methane pressurized reservoir in the ocean's largest shelf - the East Siberian Arctic Shelf - and the methane is already documented to be eruption with a highly likely "abrupt eruption" on the gigaton scale - a 5 gigaton eruption will double global warming temperatures in the near term. This was published in PNAS in 2021 but ignored in the IPCC ar6 of the same year - and the Aerosol masking Effect was dismissed as being balanced by decrease in methane emissions. The IPCC ar6 is based on ignoring the true power of Mother Nature taking revenge against Western civilization (in fact all of modern human society based on hierarchical storage of agricultural wealth).
and so we humans lived in an ecological culture from 100,000 years ago - the San Bushmen culture - it would Behoove us to study our ancient ancestors as they knew how to live without war, without raype, and all the males training in spiritual healing. I did that training to finish my master's degree since I figured out in 1996 that we were doomed. thanks
Lol what a crass comment