This is such an excellent recap of the current situation and how policy insanity has endangered the 'lucky 1 billion' who do not live in energy poverty. however, if we continue down the wind/solar route, we certainly will find ourselves there.
As we are beginning to see pushback against much of the regressive, I mean progressive, movement in many subjects, especially social topics, I expect to see the pushback here intensify greatly amid more and more electoral success for populist parties seeking to remove the engendered elitists from their roles.
note 1: the US has the world's largest coal reserves with 491 billion short tons accounting for 27% of the world's total (Curious that this energy source has been demonized.)
note 2: the US is reliant on foreign imports for 100% of its needs for the following strategic resources: Arsenic, Cesium, Fluorspar, Gallium, Graphite, Indium, Manganese, Niobium, Rare Earths, Rubidium, Scandium, Tantalum, Yttrium; see Appendix H: Strategic Materials for further details https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/references/strategic-materials/
Here's a relevant entry from Appendix H:
Uranium (Symbol U - Atomic Number 92)
Description: Uranium is a common metal found in rocks all over the world. Uranium (see attached image) occurs in combination with small amounts of other elements. Uranium ranks 48th among the most abundant elements found in natural crustal rocks. It is 1.67 times more dense than lead.
Uses: Uranium is the fuel most widely used by nuclear power plants for nuclear fission. In nuclear fission, energy is released when atoms are split apart to form smaller atoms. Nuclear power plants use the heat from nuclear fission to produce electricity.
World Resources: Economically recoverable uranium deposits have been discovered primarily in the western US, Australia, Canada, Central Asia, Africa, and South America. About 5.3% of the uranium delivered to US reactors in 2021 was produced in the US and
****> 94.7% came from other countries. <****
Substitutes: None
Note(s): Nuclear power plants use a certain type of uranium, U-235, as fuel because its atoms are easily split apart. Although uranium is about 100 times more common than silver, U-235 is relatively rare. After uranium is mined, the U-235 must be extracted and processed before it can be used as a fuel. Mined uranium ore typically yields 0.5 to 2 kg (1 to 4 pounds) of uranium oxide concentrate (U3O8 or yellowcake) per ton, or 0.05% to 0.20% yellowcake.
In recent years, the global discourse on climate change and environmental sustainability has evolved into what some scholars and policymakers are terming the "Green Cold War." This paradigm shift represents a significant departure from traditional geopolitical rivalries, with nations now competing not only for economic and military supremacy but also for dominance in renewable energy, carbon reduction, and environmental stewardship. As we navigate this new landscape, it's crucial to understand the implications and opportunities it presents.
The Green Cold War is driven by a convergence of factors. Firstly, the increasing urgency of climate change has pushed environmental concerns to the forefront of international agendas. With the devastating impacts of global warming becoming more apparent, nations are under pressure to demonstrate their commitment to sustainability.
Secondly, advancements in renewable energy technologies have reshaped the global energy market. Countries are vying for leadership in industries such as solar, wind, and electric vehicles, recognizing the potential economic advantages of being at the forefront of the clean energy transition.
Thirdly, environmental issues are increasingly intertwined with national security considerations. Climate change-induced resource scarcity, environmental degradation, and extreme weather events pose significant risks to stability and could exacerbate existing geopolitical tensions.
In this context, the Green Cold War manifests in various ways. Nations are competing to set ambitious carbon reduction targets, implement green policies, and invest in clean energy infrastructure. Diplomatic efforts increasingly focus on environmental cooperation and alliances, with initiatives like the Paris Agreement serving as battlegrounds for influence and leadership.
However, the Green Cold War also presents opportunities for collaboration and innovation. Shared environmental challenges necessitate multilateral cooperation, creating avenues for diplomatic engagement and conflict resolution. Moreover, the transition to a low-carbon economy offers economic opportunities for countries that embrace renewable energy and sustainable practices.
To navigate the Green Cold War successfully, policymakers must adopt a holistic approach that balances competition with cooperation. While rivalry may drive progress in some areas, collaboration is essential to address global environmental challenges effectively. This requires building trust, fostering dialogue, and finding common ground on shared goals.
Furthermore, addressing the root causes of environmental degradation and climate change requires addressing broader issues such as inequality, poverty, and unsustainable consumption patterns. The Green Cold War provides an opportunity to rethink our approach to development and governance, promoting a more inclusive and sustainable model of growth.
In conclusion, the Green Cold War represents a paradigm shift in global politics, with environmental concerns taking centre stage in international relations. While competition is inevitable, collaboration and innovation must remain central to our approach. By working together, nations can not only mitigate the impacts of climate change but also build a more sustainable and prosperous future for all.
Well done, and thank you. A forceful, factual, and very logical illustration of how western "leaders" have brought about a very threatening condition to their citizens. Citizens, wake up! Start judging the elites not by intentions, but by results. "If government (federal, state, and local) were kitchen gadgets you bought on Amazon, you'd return them and demand a refund" (r)
"America is positioned well to emerge from TGCW with the least damage."
This was an excellent post, gentlemen. Thank you. I would add a qualifier to your above conclusion. America will emerge with the least damage 'only after it realizes the folly of net-zero emissions, and changes course to pursue a responsible energy policy.'
Much ado (and rightfully so) is made over metals production and processing, but has anyone seriously looked at steel? If we wanted to reach net-zero with wind, my numbers (back-of-the-envelop, for sure) indicate about one-third of the US daily production would be needed. It would be worse for solar, as it requires about three times as much steel per megawatt! Has anyone asked where this steel is going to come from if we close all of our coal mines?
Oh, and we would need about 240 new, 3-MW wind turbines each day to get to net-zero by 2050. In our most productive year for adding wind (2020), the best we could do was 16 new, 3-MW wind turbines.
It doesn't matter a damn if you have the parts if you don't have anyone to put the parts together! The concerns about metals are only one part of the equation. Biden would have to literally tear down Trump's walls to find enough workers to build these monstrosities.
Given that the province of Saskatchewan is the world's largest producer of potash, and the second largest producer of uranium behind Kazakhstan, and hosts 40% of Canada's farmland, do you think the province is well-positioned to weather TGCW? Great essay.
Thanks for an excellent article. There are problems ahead. Significant problems. And with energy the vehicle and lunatics in the driver's seat, we're headed for tough times indeed. Sure, America 𝓂𝓪𝓎 come out of this better than some other countries. Feel free to think how bad it will be for them when the lights go out here.
Excellent article. The graph of Californias energy cost is shocking. At .30 per hour no one can afford to turn the lights on much less charge all the electric vehicles they are mandating. Complete ban of the combustion engine by 2036? The results will be devastating. The commercial railroads will somehow convert to all electric to serve our west coast ports? Not going to happen.
Fantastic writing Mental! Another interesting and insightful piece.
Absolutely on point. Why does it take 40 years to find someone who can craft an article. Many thx. BeN
This is such an excellent recap of the current situation and how policy insanity has endangered the 'lucky 1 billion' who do not live in energy poverty. however, if we continue down the wind/solar route, we certainly will find ourselves there.
As we are beginning to see pushback against much of the regressive, I mean progressive, movement in many subjects, especially social topics, I expect to see the pushback here intensify greatly amid more and more electoral success for populist parties seeking to remove the engendered elitists from their roles.
Here's some relevant factoids for Part 2 of TGCW from the CIA Factbook regarding the United States:
https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/united-states/
Natural resources
coal, copper, lead, molybdenum, phosphates, rare earth elements, uranium, bauxite, gold, iron, mercury, nickel, potash, silver, tungsten, zinc, petroleum, natural gas, timber, arable land;
note 1: the US has the world's largest coal reserves with 491 billion short tons accounting for 27% of the world's total (Curious that this energy source has been demonized.)
note 2: the US is reliant on foreign imports for 100% of its needs for the following strategic resources: Arsenic, Cesium, Fluorspar, Gallium, Graphite, Indium, Manganese, Niobium, Rare Earths, Rubidium, Scandium, Tantalum, Yttrium; see Appendix H: Strategic Materials for further details https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/references/strategic-materials/
Here's a relevant entry from Appendix H:
Uranium (Symbol U - Atomic Number 92)
Description: Uranium is a common metal found in rocks all over the world. Uranium (see attached image) occurs in combination with small amounts of other elements. Uranium ranks 48th among the most abundant elements found in natural crustal rocks. It is 1.67 times more dense than lead.
Uses: Uranium is the fuel most widely used by nuclear power plants for nuclear fission. In nuclear fission, energy is released when atoms are split apart to form smaller atoms. Nuclear power plants use the heat from nuclear fission to produce electricity.
US Imports: 20,077 mt (2021)
Import Sources (2021): Canada, 15.6%; Kazakhstan, 37.4%; Russia, 14.3%; Australia, 15%; Namibia, 7.3%; other, 10.3%
World Resources: Economically recoverable uranium deposits have been discovered primarily in the western US, Australia, Canada, Central Asia, Africa, and South America. About 5.3% of the uranium delivered to US reactors in 2021 was produced in the US and
****> 94.7% came from other countries. <****
Substitutes: None
Note(s): Nuclear power plants use a certain type of uranium, U-235, as fuel because its atoms are easily split apart. Although uranium is about 100 times more common than silver, U-235 is relatively rare. After uranium is mined, the U-235 must be extracted and processed before it can be used as a fuel. Mined uranium ore typically yields 0.5 to 2 kg (1 to 4 pounds) of uranium oxide concentrate (U3O8 or yellowcake) per ton, or 0.05% to 0.20% yellowcake.
Another very illuminating column!
Excellent article. It's time for the U.S. to take heed of communist regimes and stop feeding the dragon.
In recent years, the global discourse on climate change and environmental sustainability has evolved into what some scholars and policymakers are terming the "Green Cold War." This paradigm shift represents a significant departure from traditional geopolitical rivalries, with nations now competing not only for economic and military supremacy but also for dominance in renewable energy, carbon reduction, and environmental stewardship. As we navigate this new landscape, it's crucial to understand the implications and opportunities it presents.
The Green Cold War is driven by a convergence of factors. Firstly, the increasing urgency of climate change has pushed environmental concerns to the forefront of international agendas. With the devastating impacts of global warming becoming more apparent, nations are under pressure to demonstrate their commitment to sustainability.
Secondly, advancements in renewable energy technologies have reshaped the global energy market. Countries are vying for leadership in industries such as solar, wind, and electric vehicles, recognizing the potential economic advantages of being at the forefront of the clean energy transition.
Thirdly, environmental issues are increasingly intertwined with national security considerations. Climate change-induced resource scarcity, environmental degradation, and extreme weather events pose significant risks to stability and could exacerbate existing geopolitical tensions.
In this context, the Green Cold War manifests in various ways. Nations are competing to set ambitious carbon reduction targets, implement green policies, and invest in clean energy infrastructure. Diplomatic efforts increasingly focus on environmental cooperation and alliances, with initiatives like the Paris Agreement serving as battlegrounds for influence and leadership.
However, the Green Cold War also presents opportunities for collaboration and innovation. Shared environmental challenges necessitate multilateral cooperation, creating avenues for diplomatic engagement and conflict resolution. Moreover, the transition to a low-carbon economy offers economic opportunities for countries that embrace renewable energy and sustainable practices.
To navigate the Green Cold War successfully, policymakers must adopt a holistic approach that balances competition with cooperation. While rivalry may drive progress in some areas, collaboration is essential to address global environmental challenges effectively. This requires building trust, fostering dialogue, and finding common ground on shared goals.
Furthermore, addressing the root causes of environmental degradation and climate change requires addressing broader issues such as inequality, poverty, and unsustainable consumption patterns. The Green Cold War provides an opportunity to rethink our approach to development and governance, promoting a more inclusive and sustainable model of growth.
In conclusion, the Green Cold War represents a paradigm shift in global politics, with environmental concerns taking centre stage in international relations. While competition is inevitable, collaboration and innovation must remain central to our approach. By working together, nations can not only mitigate the impacts of climate change but also build a more sustainable and prosperous future for all.
Leslie Casemore
Founder
The Daily Buzz Newsletter
Great, informative article, thanks guys - in the new world order, the West is last
Well done, and thank you. A forceful, factual, and very logical illustration of how western "leaders" have brought about a very threatening condition to their citizens. Citizens, wake up! Start judging the elites not by intentions, but by results. "If government (federal, state, and local) were kitchen gadgets you bought on Amazon, you'd return them and demand a refund" (r)
"America is positioned well to emerge from TGCW with the least damage."
This was an excellent post, gentlemen. Thank you. I would add a qualifier to your above conclusion. America will emerge with the least damage 'only after it realizes the folly of net-zero emissions, and changes course to pursue a responsible energy policy.'
Much ado (and rightfully so) is made over metals production and processing, but has anyone seriously looked at steel? If we wanted to reach net-zero with wind, my numbers (back-of-the-envelop, for sure) indicate about one-third of the US daily production would be needed. It would be worse for solar, as it requires about three times as much steel per megawatt! Has anyone asked where this steel is going to come from if we close all of our coal mines?
Oh, and we would need about 240 new, 3-MW wind turbines each day to get to net-zero by 2050. In our most productive year for adding wind (2020), the best we could do was 16 new, 3-MW wind turbines.
It doesn't matter a damn if you have the parts if you don't have anyone to put the parts together! The concerns about metals are only one part of the equation. Biden would have to literally tear down Trump's walls to find enough workers to build these monstrosities.
Given that the province of Saskatchewan is the world's largest producer of potash, and the second largest producer of uranium behind Kazakhstan, and hosts 40% of Canada's farmland, do you think the province is well-positioned to weather TGCW? Great essay.
Excellent geopolitical overview. Thank you for all your research.
Thanks for an excellent article. There are problems ahead. Significant problems. And with energy the vehicle and lunatics in the driver's seat, we're headed for tough times indeed. Sure, America 𝓂𝓪𝓎 come out of this better than some other countries. Feel free to think how bad it will be for them when the lights go out here.
Excellent article. The graph of Californias energy cost is shocking. At .30 per hour no one can afford to turn the lights on much less charge all the electric vehicles they are mandating. Complete ban of the combustion engine by 2036? The results will be devastating. The commercial railroads will somehow convert to all electric to serve our west coast ports? Not going to happen.