Maybe it goes without saying but “Jevons Paradox” is no paradox at all. Once an item (energy in this case) becomes more affordable and abundant its use expands and thus it’s in even higher demand. History also shows quality of life increases as energy use increases.
Thank you very much for your contribution to human sanity.
All this back and forth begs the question of what are the incentives (the late C. Munger) for the likes of Bloomberg, Biden and Gates to so forcefully oppose the answer to abundant electricity. Bipolar, I guess!
You're welcome. It's a fair question. It's not obvious that any of them are Green Malthusians. Bloomberg was even a big natural gas advocate for some time.
Thank you for allowing us the privilege of the Canadian prairies and the bush. Some of favorite landscapes and people on earth.
An absolute gem of an article, thank you! And I believe you are right, the world was already tipping towards we won't have enough power. As you point out we are now there thanks to the AI push.
From a human perspective, we're more worried about the developing world right now than watching the West flog itself with bad energy policy, then self-correct. The bottom 4 billion in living conditions is a bigger concern. Energy #1, food #2, corruption #3.
The real entrepreneurs are probably hiding in their garages and are already figuring out how to mimic the energy efficiency of the human brain..solving the energy problem and more useful AI that actually solves real problems at the same time. Then the bubble pops of both government fueled manias in climatech that solves no real problems (actually creates many unintended consequences like food inflation, high electricity costs…) and AI mania at the same time. We get cool new technologies, more empowered people and planet can regenerate. Government employees of both parties resign across the board as they no longer have a purpose. Perhaps this is just my imagination but it works for me. People realize wasting tons of resources is the least creative thing you can do. Most Silicon Valley VCs retire and the mighty tech overlords start working for 12 year olds. 😂😂😂
Mental, fascinating article and glad to see reality in numerical format. The numbers do not lie and even the most hardened environMENTAList will squeal (like a pig?) and demand solutions when their power goes out. As you fellas pointed out, between Big Tech and Big Green, my fiat is on Big Tech. Wonderful article and looking forward to the next.
Thank you. It's going to be a slog. We have rising confidence that enough voices are leading with enough reason, fact, quantification, data, etc. that at the very least, those who guided down the wrong track will NOT be able to get away with "who was I to know!".
We see the EU elections in two months as a proxy for the electorates recognizing the consequences. And we are hopeful.
‘The lights come on or they don’t.’ I thought this simple phrase would end the climate alarmists hold on energy policy. I am happy to see an additional factor thrown in the mix. ‘The data is produced or it isn’t.’
Robin Hood opened a great discussion on power consumption in the context of NVIDIA. 3.5 million H100s would consume ~13 TWH power annually, which is about the same amount of power consumed annually by Chicago. That is in the context of the US using 4,000 TWH annually and China 6,800 TWH annually. There are several things that seem to be approaching a Fourth Turning moment. Power consumption is one; $350T of global debt is another; the cost of higher education another. This zipcode of Substack is informed and highly rational. The algorithm pushes us ever deeper into conversations with like minded people. I wonder if there is another part of Substack inhabited by the folks peddling platitudes and whether the two can be connected in the hope that some minds might be changed?
Superb comment. We have no publishing experience and hoped that our 'Stack would evolve in that manner. But the algo drives us like-minded, which is good for our growth and a community.
We'd happily participate in a forum of some sorts where the two sides are connected and a civil, if tough, hashing out of these issues is had, in the light of day and engaging all civil discourse.
See Tucker's latest interview. David Blackmon mentioned it on his Substack this morning. After watching the interview, I naturally had to dig deeper into the subject and his group. Absolutely fascinating.
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual.”
Galileo Galilei
Believe = religion
Think = opinion
Know = science
Here is what I know.
What do you know that’s different?
GHE theory fails because of these two erroneous assumptions:
Earth is warmed by GHE/GHGs preventing it from becoming a 33 C cooler, 255 K, -18 C ball of ice.
Wrong.
&
Earth’s surface radiates as a black body creating “extra” upwelling LWIR energy out of a theoretical calculation.
Wrong.
Remove the Earth’s atmosphere or even just the GHGs and the Earth becomes much like the Moon, no water vapor or clouds, no ice or snow, no oceans, no vegetation, no 30% albedo becoming a barren rock ball, hot^3 (400 K) on the lit side, cold^3 (100 K) on the dark. At our distance from the Sun space is hot (394 K) not cold (5 K).
Because of the significant non-radiative, i.e. kinetic, heat transfer processes of the contiguous participating atmospheric molecules the surface cannot upwell “extra” energy as a BB, e.g. TFK_bams09 (396 BB up/333 “back”/2nd 63 net) violating LoT.
As demonstrated by experiment, the gold standard of classical science.
GHE theory & CAGW climate “science” are indefensible pseudo-science rubbish forcing alarmists into fear mongering, lies, lawsuits, censorship and violence.
Oh I completely agree. It's just hard to have trod the planet for 50 plus years and watch fools delude themselves in so many ways. It has always been thus, but somehow the invention of internal combustion seems a little less immediately problematic than gargantuan data centers pumping out imaginary currency and artificially intelligent stuff.
Thanks for the update. it never ceases to amaze me how the eco warriors cannot understand reality. Doomberg said it best, in the battle between physics and platitudes, physics is undefeated. This is simply another instance of that truth
And, in relation to people like Mark Z. Jacobson and others who claim a $28 trillion advanced economy can run 100% off "WWS" (wind, water (hydro), solar), we also hear Doom ringing in our ears.... "it works at university!". (SMH)
I see the harsh Darwinian force arrising as EROEI becomes the dominant consideration (as opposed to LCOE and variants) as to which and how energy is produced as we continue to evolve our societ(y/ies).
Energy generation is the real engine of wealth creation, so there ought to be a preference for technologies with a high return on energy invested. The choice to mine the wealth of populations instead, risking the very collapse of civilization in a spectacular fraud, is truly dismaying.
We're stuck with gas and (some) conventional nuclear for now, but we could easily improve on the energy return over renewables by a hundredfold with better (and proven) nuclear technology. People may be impatient, but it should still be the rational choice; is a world freed from scarcity really so unpalatable?
a world free from scarcity is not only unpalatable, but would seem to be the least we can do for 3-5 billion people below our living standards. really.
EROEI does seem like a dark cloud ahead. Whether that's 5 years, 25 years or 75 years is hard to say. All eyes on the Permian for rollover and decline for now.
Maybe it goes without saying but “Jevons Paradox” is no paradox at all. Once an item (energy in this case) becomes more affordable and abundant its use expands and thus it’s in even higher demand. History also shows quality of life increases as energy use increases.
Yup.
Thank you very much for your contribution to human sanity.
All this back and forth begs the question of what are the incentives (the late C. Munger) for the likes of Bloomberg, Biden and Gates to so forcefully oppose the answer to abundant electricity. Bipolar, I guess!
You're welcome. It's a fair question. It's not obvious that any of them are Green Malthusians. Bloomberg was even a big natural gas advocate for some time.
Thank you for allowing us the privilege of the Canadian prairies and the bush. Some of favorite landscapes and people on earth.
Great article!
Thanks!
I agree.
Let’s hope Europe supports energy sanity. Your allies in US remain hopeful for a global energy renaissance, including good policy making.
We think it (EU) will. Eventually......
But if asked to handicap it, we'd say that Europe will play more stupid games and win more stupid prizes before that happens.
An absolute gem of an article, thank you! And I believe you are right, the world was already tipping towards we won't have enough power. As you point out we are now there thanks to the AI push.
Thank you!
We'll get there. After some fits and starts.
From a human perspective, we're more worried about the developing world right now than watching the West flog itself with bad energy policy, then self-correct. The bottom 4 billion in living conditions is a bigger concern. Energy #1, food #2, corruption #3.
The real entrepreneurs are probably hiding in their garages and are already figuring out how to mimic the energy efficiency of the human brain..solving the energy problem and more useful AI that actually solves real problems at the same time. Then the bubble pops of both government fueled manias in climatech that solves no real problems (actually creates many unintended consequences like food inflation, high electricity costs…) and AI mania at the same time. We get cool new technologies, more empowered people and planet can regenerate. Government employees of both parties resign across the board as they no longer have a purpose. Perhaps this is just my imagination but it works for me. People realize wasting tons of resources is the least creative thing you can do. Most Silicon Valley VCs retire and the mighty tech overlords start working for 12 year olds. 😂😂😂
We like your imagination! (but, unfortunately, do not see a likelihood that "government employees of both parties resign.....")
Mental, fascinating article and glad to see reality in numerical format. The numbers do not lie and even the most hardened environMENTAList will squeal (like a pig?) and demand solutions when their power goes out. As you fellas pointed out, between Big Tech and Big Green, my fiat is on Big Tech. Wonderful article and looking forward to the next.
Thanks, Psycho!
We really hope someone gets TikTok video of them squealing like pigs when their power goes out. Lots of them. Please send to us!
LOL. It sure is a disturbing image.
Great exposition on our current moment in time, environMENTAL.
Economics, technology and energy are in our future no matter what.
Bad decisions have ended most political careers and bad regulations have ended too few careers.
Finally, Shakespeare would not be surprised by any of this.
Thank you. It's going to be a slog. We have rising confidence that enough voices are leading with enough reason, fact, quantification, data, etc. that at the very least, those who guided down the wrong track will NOT be able to get away with "who was I to know!".
We see the EU elections in two months as a proxy for the electorates recognizing the consequences. And we are hopeful.
‘The lights come on or they don’t.’ I thought this simple phrase would end the climate alarmists hold on energy policy. I am happy to see an additional factor thrown in the mix. ‘The data is produced or it isn’t.’
We know, right!??!!??
It will only end the climate alarmists hold on tue energy policy when the lights truly go out. Cheers!
Expect some of that, too....
Robin Hood opened a great discussion on power consumption in the context of NVIDIA. 3.5 million H100s would consume ~13 TWH power annually, which is about the same amount of power consumed annually by Chicago. That is in the context of the US using 4,000 TWH annually and China 6,800 TWH annually. There are several things that seem to be approaching a Fourth Turning moment. Power consumption is one; $350T of global debt is another; the cost of higher education another. This zipcode of Substack is informed and highly rational. The algorithm pushes us ever deeper into conversations with like minded people. I wonder if there is another part of Substack inhabited by the folks peddling platitudes and whether the two can be connected in the hope that some minds might be changed?
Superb comment. We have no publishing experience and hoped that our 'Stack would evolve in that manner. But the algo drives us like-minded, which is good for our growth and a community.
We'd happily participate in a forum of some sorts where the two sides are connected and a civil, if tough, hashing out of these issues is had, in the light of day and engaging all civil discourse.
I guess we might need to go find ‘foreign’ neighborhoods and start linking back here - see if anyone take the bait…
See Tucker's latest interview. David Blackmon mentioned it on his Substack this morning. After watching the interview, I naturally had to dig deeper into the subject and his group. Absolutely fascinating.
Which one, Mary?
https://open.substack.com/pub/davidblackmon/p/tucker-carlson-the-vibe-shift?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=lm719
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual.”
Galileo Galilei
Believe = religion
Think = opinion
Know = science
Here is what I know.
What do you know that’s different?
GHE theory fails because of these two erroneous assumptions:
Earth is warmed by GHE/GHGs preventing it from becoming a 33 C cooler, 255 K, -18 C ball of ice.
Wrong.
&
Earth’s surface radiates as a black body creating “extra” upwelling LWIR energy out of a theoretical calculation.
Wrong.
Remove the Earth’s atmosphere or even just the GHGs and the Earth becomes much like the Moon, no water vapor or clouds, no ice or snow, no oceans, no vegetation, no 30% albedo becoming a barren rock ball, hot^3 (400 K) on the lit side, cold^3 (100 K) on the dark. At our distance from the Sun space is hot (394 K) not cold (5 K).
Because of the significant non-radiative, i.e. kinetic, heat transfer processes of the contiguous participating atmospheric molecules the surface cannot upwell “extra” energy as a BB, e.g. TFK_bams09 (396 BB up/333 “back”/2nd 63 net) violating LoT.
As demonstrated by experiment, the gold standard of classical science.
https://principia-scientific.org/debunking-the-greenhouse-gas-theory-with-a-boiling-water-pot/
GHE theory & CAGW climate “science” are indefensible pseudo-science rubbish forcing alarmists into fear mongering, lies, lawsuits, censorship and violence.
Oh I completely agree. It's just hard to have trod the planet for 50 plus years and watch fools delude themselves in so many ways. It has always been thus, but somehow the invention of internal combustion seems a little less immediately problematic than gargantuan data centers pumping out imaginary currency and artificially intelligent stuff.
Agreed!
Thanks for the update. it never ceases to amaze me how the eco warriors cannot understand reality. Doomberg said it best, in the battle between physics and platitudes, physics is undefeated. This is simply another instance of that truth
Yup. We think of that one all the time.
And, in relation to people like Mark Z. Jacobson and others who claim a $28 trillion advanced economy can run 100% off "WWS" (wind, water (hydro), solar), we also hear Doom ringing in our ears.... "it works at university!". (SMH)
100%
I see the harsh Darwinian force arrising as EROEI becomes the dominant consideration (as opposed to LCOE and variants) as to which and how energy is produced as we continue to evolve our societ(y/ies).
Energy generation is the real engine of wealth creation, so there ought to be a preference for technologies with a high return on energy invested. The choice to mine the wealth of populations instead, risking the very collapse of civilization in a spectacular fraud, is truly dismaying.
We're stuck with gas and (some) conventional nuclear for now, but we could easily improve on the energy return over renewables by a hundredfold with better (and proven) nuclear technology. People may be impatient, but it should still be the rational choice; is a world freed from scarcity really so unpalatable?
a world free from scarcity is not only unpalatable, but would seem to be the least we can do for 3-5 billion people below our living standards. really.
EROEI does seem like a dark cloud ahead. Whether that's 5 years, 25 years or 75 years is hard to say. All eyes on the Permian for rollover and decline for now.
Excellent read! When reality hits, people want reliability over green!
Thanks!
Nuclear solves both. Just going to take a while and first 8-10 are going to be costly.....