[AdamB]

There are claims about a new storage system called THERMO photovoltaic cells. They could end up as cheap as $10 / khw for storage. It could take 5 to 10 years to roll out at a commercial level, but the costing papers seem available. What do you all think?

I think that the doomers looking for the end of the world won't ever admit that the technologies that don't require sucking oil down by the millions of barrels a day are already out and about, some folks have begun using them, and the only question is whether or not the shape of the S-curve of market disruption happens sooner or later.

Tony Seba has already covered this awhile ago, and while a bit enthusiastic, he has a better argument for his position than any peak oil doomer that has published to date. I don't normally recommend BoobTube videos, but Tony doing his presentation isn't your standard unreferenced, uneducated, designed for entertaining the stupid type stuff.

[vtsnowedin]

I'm fine with them building out renewable energy systems and compatible storage systems of any type to render the energy dispatchable to meet 95% of demand as long as they build it out first and have it working smoothly on line BEFORE they shut off the thermal plant it will replace. I also think not only will used EV batteries be a cheap source of storage capacity but millions of EVs plugged in at any one time will give smart grids the ability to both give and take power from them as the grid needs it or has it to give.
What we have today on the other hand is a war declared on fossil fuels with major attacks on supply long before the EV cars are on the road in sufficient numbers to replace fossil fuel demand or much of any renewable power production in place compared to total energy needs and a ridiculously low amount of storage.
It is as dumb as a country declaring Nuclear war on another country when it has at present no nuclear weapons. Before we can get to a smart grid we need to find some smart leaders.

[Doly]

I think that the doomers looking for the end of the world won't ever admit that the technologies that don't require sucking oil down by the millions of barrels a day are already out and about, some folks have begun using them, and the only question is whether or not the shape of the S-curve of market disruption happens sooner or later.

Of course electric cars are out and about. But the question then becomes: where is the electricity going to come from? Sure, enthusiastic people keep going on about how easy and possible is the energy transition away from fossil fuels. But it keeps not happening very fast, so it isn't that easy. I did some work on trying to model the energy transition, and it was pretty clear that there was never any guarantee of it working out. The problem was, in a business-as-usual scenario, the way that energy transitions appear to have happened so far, it didn't look likely to happen. And we haven't seen the sort of dramatic policy decisions that would indicate that we aren't going for a business-as-usual scenario.

[AdamB]

I think that the doomers looking for the end of the world won't ever admit that the technologies that don't require sucking oil down by the millions of barrels a day are already out and about, some folks have begun using them, and the only question is whether or not the shape of the S-curve of market disruption happens sooner or later.

Of course electric cars are out and about. But the question then becomes: where is the electricity going to come from?

Mine comes from the local utility and the panels on the roof of the garage. Last time I calculated it when Plant asked a stupid question they didn't think I could answer, it was a majority and then some from renewables? Coal and natural gas being the two fossil fuels hanging in there, but in a minority. I've been thinking about boosting my panel coverage, if memory serves I thought that would push me over the 75% mark for renewables for the house and cars, but I've been too lazy, and the price of electricity isn't that expensive, and the wife fills up the EV at work, and those electrons then last for a day or three of normal suburban running around.

I recommend building nukes. Soon.

Sure, enthusiastic people keep going on about how easy and possible is the energy transition away from fossil fuels. But it keeps not happening very fast, so it isn't that easy.

Yes, well, how many models have you built with S-curves when it comes to market penetration, and what did that level of disruption look like? Lets see...slow at first...and then all of a sudden like?

I did some work on trying to model the energy transition, and it was pretty clear that there was never any guarantee of it working out.

Model it out...how? Folks tried to model just small pieces, like the demise of oil production, and look how that went for folks who couldn't be bothered to learn the subject matter first. And that was just OIL. What economic logic might you have used when just modeling out the transition from fossil fuels to renewables and nukes under differing legislation scenarios around the world? That one alone must just be awful to code out.

The problem was, in a business-as-usual scenario, the way that energy transitions appear to have happened so far, it didn't look likely to happen.

And how do you code in "business as usual", other than having a "humanity is stupid" function you created? How did you handle the economic competition between resources, in order that scarcity might work itself out honestly and arrive at renewables and nukes and whatnot as the final winner?

And we haven't seen the sort of dramatic policy decisions that would indicate that we aren't going for a business-as-usual scenario.

The economic competition handles that. The application of resource cost curves for non-renewables handles the price escalation allowing the buildout of renewables and nukes, and then economies of scale tend to give you the S-curve effect. That didn't work out in your model for some reason? Policy is arbitrary, the rules of conservation and substitution will dictate policy, not the other way around.

[eclipse]

Of course electric cars are out and about.

They're not just out and about, but on an exponential curve.
The costs are coming down soon.
The LIFETIME cost of an EV will soon be cheaper than the lifetime cost of ICE cars.

But the question then becomes: where is the electricity going to come from?

First, this is a question we'd ask from a climate point of view and yes it is important.

Second, from a peak oil point of view - who the heck cares? They're not relying on the holy of holies - oil - as a form of transport! But this is of course anathema to a peak oil doomer. It isn't. Supposed. To. Be. Viable. Full stop. But that exponential curve is away - and even Toyota the diehard hydrogen wannabes have finally capitulated and said they will be putting $60 BILLION into their new EV fleet ASAP.

Sure, enthusiastic people keep going on about how easy and possible is the energy transition away from fossil fuels.

You got the point from the above? Cars that go - without oil? Good. Just checking. Then are you telling us that these cars are fussy about what electrons they drink? They're gonna vomit if they get solar from someone's rooftop, hydropower from the local pumped hydro battery, or even electrons from the local neighbourhood battery charger because these guys really want to charge then and there - even if it's a bit more expensive?

Transport energy just became fungible - and with VTG tech you can even pass it forward if you don't want it now. One day we might share our transport energy if we only need say 60km the next day - and can sell the other 200km for profit.

But it keeps not happening very fast

Yes and no.
Globally, renewables are now being built faster than fossil fuels.

I did some work on trying to model the energy transition, and it was pretty clear that there was never any guarantee of it working out.

Except, as I noted above, that target keeps moving. Solar is a quarter the cost of gas peakers - and should drop even further. That means you can built multiples of the grid out in solar and use the excess to pump water up hill.

Off-river pumped hydro batteries are possible. America has 100 times the potential off-river pumped hydro storage than you'd need to stabilise your grid. 100 times! Choose the best 1%, build the dams, pump the water in from a nearby river, cover with plastic or floating solar farms (which helps the solar panels remain cool and operate more efficiently) and studies show it might even reduce evaporation to the point where local rainfall tops up the artificial dam.

The problem was, in a business-as-usual scenario, the way that energy transitions appear to have happened so far, it didn't look likely to happen.

Not sure what this sentence even means in an 'electrify everything' world that is going to see modern grids with 6 TIMES the electricity on them because everything from transport to home heating is being electrified.

And we haven't seen the sort of dramatic policy decisions that would indicate that we aren't going for a business-as-usual scenario.

But we have seen market decisions such as more renewables being built globally every year than fossil fuels. We are seeing younger people more likely to recognise climate change as a thing than older people. Those sceptical diehards are dying. Things are changing - and so fast - even an old EcoModernist nuclear fan like me is starting to question whether nukes will even be needed!

[eclipse]

If a disaster wipes out the majority of your population...
..surviving cops or authority figures need to get in charge and encourage belief in the system

"Did you come up with that kind of drivel? Belief in the system."

Um, cherrypicking much? I also wrote:

And if the catastrophe carried off all decency and common sense – remember this. Even warlords like hot showers and cold beer. Even tyrants hate total anarchy! They might want their kind of order, but at least it is some sort of order. If you’ve seen Narco’s you’ll know what I mean. The Mexican drug cartels formed huge corporation-level drug empires. They organised enormous lines of supply, chains of command, technical support, and administrative support all the way down to logistics and accounting divisions. Most post-apocalyptic warlords want technical recovery to run their toys, even if that’s something strange like a V8 muscle car rigged up on some locally cooked home brew. Technology and knowledge would most probably be valued – even if the political progress came through painful revolutions later on. It’s the decent into generations of competition and barbarism instead of co-operation and progress that chills the mind. I’m optimistic our own self-interest would prevent this from happening and get us organised!

I'm saying that there is self-interest in getting organised. Even Taliban warlords like electricity and hot showers and fridges and medicine. My page dreams of saving the best political processes - but also captures snapshots of what order might look like under despots. It's not my fault you can't comprehend this.

But I might have to restructure that section of my page starting with the despots for clarity of writing. My point is I do not have to hope for the best to guarantee human selfishness. It's a thing. And even warlords like their toys - which requires some sort of organisation and structure. And then things become self-organising, the geeks are left to dig up and read old manuals, and everything starts again.

[vtsnowedin]

Of course electric cars are out and about.

They're not just out and about, but on an exponential curve.

Yes but they are still at the bottom left end of that curve and the exact line forward has yet to be drawn with precision.

[mousepad]

It's not my fault you can't comprehend this.

You're talking about:

If a disaster wipes out the majority of your population...

That is an event that has such far reaching and unpredictable consequences that it is ridiculous to come up with any kind of contingency plan.

I'm saying that there is self-interest in getting organised.

Yes, but it will come naturally, as it always has. No need for a master plan.

[mousepad]

They're not just out and about, but on an exponential curve.

They might not stay on an exponential curve. Nobody knows.

Only one person knows the future and that is AdamB. He has a model that predicts the future up to the year 2050. Unfortunately he's too shy to share. I'm wondering what the model does in the year 2050. Maybe there's a division by 0 error and the software crashes?

[AdamB]

Only one person knows the future and that is AdamB. He has a model that predicts the future up to the year 2050. Unfortunately he's too shy to share. I'm wondering what the model does in the year 2050. Maybe there's a division by 0 error and the software crashes?

It does predict the future. Outputted properly I might add. Irritates the folks who don't understand statistics though, confusing "predicting" with a deterministic answer. Silly rabbits they be.

It stops in 2050 because I told it to. If I told it to run to 2100 it would do that instead. I've already mentioned the problem, run time issues. Pay closer attention next time.

[mousepad]

It does predict the future.

I'm a sucker for predictions. Can't you throw me a bone?
What does it model? Only oil stuff? Or the world?
* population
* energy
* environmental degradation
* water
* other resources
* weather/climate impact

Is there anything eventful happening till 2050?
Or is it more of the same?

I've already mentioned the problem, run time issues.

Now you got me even more interested. A model that has run time issues? That must be enormously complex. Why does it have run time issues?

Here is the World3 model simulation online. It simulates to 2100 and beyond in a few seconds.
https://insightmaker.com/insight/2pCL5e ... Simulation

[eclipse]

Yes, but it will come naturally, as it always has. No need for a master plan.

Who said I'm drawing up a master plan?
I'm just outlining the most probable scenarios due to the observable trends. Of course everything depends on the scope of the initial disaster, the kind of people that were killed, the kind of people that remain, etc. But where some see this civilisation as having 'used everything up', there are still amazing resources in nuked out cities. Concentrations of metals and knowledge and resources that can be salvaged to bootstrap the next incarnation. Old engines that can be adapted to run on wood-smoke - New South Wales had 65,000 vehicles running on wood-smoke during WW2. That sort of thing. It only takes one person with the know-how to read a manual and cook this up. One out of the tens of thousands of survivors in such a scenario. Wood smoke. Let alone all the other expertise that could be in such a group of survivors. My page just outlines possible scenarios. I guess the only bit where I get to lecturing is in outlining the benefits of clustering in larger towns rather than smaller villages, which allows specialisation. That's just to get the "City Size Bonus" concept out there more than anything. People and groups will do whatever they do. I'm just tracing the broadest possibilities - different regions will do different things in such a scenario - but eventually they'll trade knowledge and skills and resources with each other - and things will bounce back.

Try 18 minutes with Isaac Arthur - he's da man!

[mousepad]

I'm just outlining the most probable scenarios

That is very debatable. I think it greatly depend on the type of disaster. If we assume a virus killing 80% of the population while leaving all technology and environment intact. Yes, maybe in that case it's going to work out as you say.

If there's complete destruction (nuclear) or other gross environmental degradation, the situation is probably much different.
Keep in mind that the medievel ages didn't pick up the pieces from the romans. Practically everything was lost and had to be reinvented. Keep in mind that the Europeans didn't learn from the aztecs/mayas. Everything was demolished and forgotten.

It only takes one person with the know-how to read a manual and cook this up. One out of the tens of thousands of survivors in such a scenario.

That's an interesting comment. To think that currently there are still tons of back-water 3rd world countries out there. The only thing they have to do is look, learn and copy successful nations and industries. Yet they don't or can't or won't. What makes you think that somebody will dig up a user manual of an iphone and the light of ideas will go on in his head?

the benefits of clustering in larger towns rather than smaller villages, which allows specialisation.

It's not the large town that allows specialization. It's the surplus in energy and food available that allows towns.
And whether surplus energy/food is available after a disaster is very questionable.

People and groups will do whatever they do.

Yes.

[AdamB]

It does predict the future.

I'm a sucker for predictions. Can't you throw me a bone?
What does it model? Only oil stuff? Or the world?

You are just stroking my ego to get me to show off. I'll throw you a bone for knowing how to wheedle information and throw you a bone.
I use it internationally mostly, excluding the US by default. It handles 5 grades of crude, dry and wet natural gas, ethane and LPG.

Is there anything eventful happening till 2050?

Depends. It is a simulator. What scenario would you simulate? My favorites say that renewables and nukes and whatnot better work sooner rather than later, otherwise costs to consumers for hydrocarbons, particularly liquid ones, could be interesting by 2030, in order to sustain expected volumes. Lower long term expected volumes, and by extension you begin mitigating the price necessary for more advanced recovery techniques. "Eventful" is relative to you, I consider price increases, particularly long term deviations from the past, interesting from an economic perspective in general.

I've already mentioned the problem, run time issues.

Now you got me even more interested. A model that has run time issues? That must be enormously complex. Why does it have run time issues?

It isn't an LP.

Here is the World3 model simulation online. It simulates to 2100 and beyond in a few seconds.
https://insightmaker.com/insight/2pCL5e ... Simulation

The World3 model is an LP. It functions as an LP anyway, if I understood Doly correctly when we discussed this before. And lumps all non-renewables into a category with a starting value of like "1". Whatever "1" means. All models are wrong, some are useful. Price and volume are useful in the real world, today. World3 declaring that the world ends because exponential economic growth outstrips the means to feed it is just axiomatic. Didn't require the original model or any newer one to know that. Back when LTG was built I can see it being all cool and stuff, after all, it came out of a computer. Who back then knew about GIGO? Well, I suppose HAL9000 might have been a clue to anyone paying attention.

[kublikhan]

Keep in mind that the medievel ages didn't pick up the pieces from the romans. Practically everything was lost and had to be reinvented.

That's not true. Much of the Greek & Roman knowledge was picked up by the Islamic empires. While Europe was in its 'dark ages', the Islamic empires were in a golden age building on the ideas of the Greeks and Romans. Later this knowledge was spread back to Europe as well.

The two great civilizations of classical antiquity were ancient Greece and ancient Rome. The Romans borrowed many ideas and techniques from the Greeks.

Some of the most significant advances in scholarship made during the Middle Ages were made by Islamic scholars. During the 600s and 700s, Muslims spread their religion across North Africa into the Iberian Peninsula, through the Middle East, and into the lands of the Byzantine Empire. Some of these areas had previously been conquered and governed by Alexander the Great, who exposed them to Hellenistic Greek culture and then by the Romans. The Muslim conquerors eventually came into possession of various Greek and Roman manuscripts. Rather than destroy these works, Muslim scholars carefully preserved them, translating them into Arabic, studying them, and in some cases building on ideas set down by the ancient writers in their own works. The Muslims were particularly interested in philosophic and scientific works. (Students who were in Core Knowledge schools in Grade 4 should have learned about significant Muslim contributions to learning during the Middle Ages, including Arabic numbers and algebra, as well as the achievements of particular scholars such as Ibn Sina, known in Europe as Avicenna.)

Jewish scholars in Muslim-held areas such as Spain and Egypt also studied and used Greco-Roman writings. One of the best known of the Jewish scholars was Maimonides, who lived in Cordoba, Spain, and Cairo, Egypt. Maimonides was a doctor and philosopher who tried to reconcile science and religion in his writings. It was mainly through the efforts of these scholars that the works of the Greeks and Romans were preserved for later Europeans. Although artists and scholars were working in any number of Muslim cities (Baghdad, Constantinople, Timbuktu, Damascus, and Cairo, for example), the cities of Andalusia in southern Spain were especially rich centers of scientific work and artistic development.

Over time, these Latin translations began to be studied at European universities that sprang up in the late Middle Ages, and Greek began to be studied again as well.

Preserving Classical Civilization

The transmission of the Greek Classics to Latin Western Europe during the Middle Ages was a key factor in the development of intellectual life in Western Europe. Interest in Greek texts and their availability was scarce in the Latin West during the earlier Middle Ages, but as traffic to the East increased, so did Western scholarship.

Classical Greek philosophy consisted of various original works ranging from those from Ancient Greece (e.g. Aristotle) to those Greco-Roman scholars in the classical Roman Empire (e.g. Ptolemy). Though these works were originally written in Greek, for centuries the language of scholarship in the Mediterranean region, many were translated into Syriac, Arabic, and Persian during the Middle Ages and the original Greek versions were often unknown to the West. With increasing Western presence in the East due to the Crusades, and the gradual collapse of the Byzantine Empire during the later Middle Ages, many Byzantine Greek scholars fled to Western Europe, bringing with them many original Greek manuscripts, and providing impetus for Greek-language education in the West and further translation efforts of Greek scholarship into Latin.

As knowledge of Greek declined in the West with the fall of the Western Roman Empire, so did knowledge of the Greek texts, many of which had remained without a Latin translation. The fragile nature of papyrus as a writing medium meant that older texts not copied onto expensive parchment would eventually crumble and be lost. After the Fourth Crusade (1202–1204) and the Sack of Constantinople (1204), scholars such as William of Moerbeke gained access to the original Greek texts of scientists and philosophers, including Aristotle, Archimedes, Hero of Alexandria and Proclus, that had been preserved in the Byzantine (Eastern Roman) Empire, and translated them directly into Latin.

Classical Greek learning was firmly found in every metropolis of the Roman empire, including in Rome itself. In Rome, Boethius propagated works of Greek classical learning. Boethius intended to pass on the great Greco-Roman culture to future generations by writing manuals on music and astronomy, geometry, and arithmetic.

Arabic logicians had inherited Greek ideas after they had invaded and conquered Egypt and the Levant. Their translations and commentaries on these ideas worked their way through the Arab West into Spain and Sicily, which became important centers for this transmission of ideas. Western Arabic translations of Greek works (found in Iberia and Sicily) originates in the Greek sources preserved by the Byzantines.

Western European reception of Greek ideas via the Arabian tradition
While Greek ideas gradually permeated the Islamic world, Muslims conquests extended to the European continent. Spain was conquered by the Arabs around 700 AD, even reaching as far as Poitiers, France by 732 (Battle of Tours). By 902 Sicily was conquered. With the aid of Greek and other ideas, Spain in particular quickly became the most heavily populated and thriving area in Europe. One of the rulers of Muslim Spain, Al-Hakam II, made an effort to gather books from all over the Arab world, creating a library which would later become a center for translation into Latin. As books were gathered, so were many Arab scholars who had studied Greek ideas in the east. For example, Muhammud ibn 'Abdun and 'Abdu'l-Rahman ibn Ismail came to Spain and introduced many ideas about medicine as well as several of the works of Aristotle and Euclid. Ibn Bajjah (known as "Avempace") and Ibn Rushd (known as “Averroes”) were among the other famous philosophers of Spain who furthered the expansion of Greek ideas in medicine and philosophy.

After the Reconquista of the 12th century Spain opened even further for Christian scholars, who were now able to work in “friendly” religious territory. As these Europeans encountered Islamic philosophy, their previously held fears turned to admiration, and from Spain came a wealth of Arab knowledge of mathematics and astronomy. Foreigners came to Spain to translate from all over Europe, and Toledo became a center for such travelers, since so many of its citizens wrote daily in both Arabic and Latin-based languages. By the 13th century, translation had declined in Spain, but it was on the rise in Italy and Sicily, and from there to all of Europe. Adelard of Bath, an Englishman, traveled to Sicily and the Arab world, translating works on astronomy and mathematics, including the first complete translation of Euclid's Elements.

Transmission of the Greek Classics

[vtsnowedin]

I think you are missing the role the christian church had on suppressing all information not derived from their doctrine. They routinely burned whole libraries of "pagan" books and scrolls and thereby created the darkness of their age.
It lasted all the way to the Renaissance before scientific thinking began to replace' just waiting for the second coming of Christ' and was still holding progress back to the 1800s and the debate about evolution.

[mousepad]

I think you are missing the role the christian church had on suppressing all information

That doesn't negate my argumentation. Or do you think after a disaster that wipes out the majority of the population we won't have some sort of religion trying to make sense of it all? Heck, even white-house Joey & crew is trying to burn all kind of pagan information from the face of the earth in the holy name of wokeness.

If technology brought the disaster upon us it might be reasonable to think that a anti-technology religion takes hold. Who knows?

Roman britain collapsed into the dark ages 2 centuries before the arrival of Christianity in England. There should have been plenty of time to learn from the marvels of roman engineering still standing, at least according to the poster eclipse.

[mousepad]

That's not true. Much of the Greek & Roman knowledge was picked up by the Islamic empires. While Europe was in its 'dark ages', the Islamic empires were in a golden age building on the ideas of the Greeks and Romans. Later this knowledge was spread back to Europe as well.

Then it's even worse. That means the knowledge was never really lost but just moved from one functioning civilization to another.

Yet it took Europe 1500 years to get back into the game.
Eclipse claims to pick up and move from debris within a few generations. No intact civilization to refer to and learn from needed. Bootstrapping from a few books found in some preserved library. I find that unlikely.

[mousepad]

otherwise costs to consumers for hydrocarbons, particularly liquid ones, could be interesting by 2030, in order to sustain expected volumes.

That sounds exciting. I'm looking forward to seeing this and I will hold you to your prediction. 2030 ain't far out.

The World3 model is an LP..

What is LP? The only LP I know is used to store music.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LP_record

[vtsnowedin]

I think you are missing the role the christian church had on suppressing all information

That doesn't negate my argumentation. Or do you think after a disaster that wipes out the majority of the population we won't have some sort of religion trying to make sense of it all? Heck, even white-house Joey & crew is trying to burn all kind of pagan information from the face of the earth in the holy name of wokeness.

If technology brought the disaster upon us it might be reasonable to think that a anti-technology religion takes hold. Who knows?

Roman britain collapsed into the dark ages 2 centuries before the arrival of Christianity in England. There should have been plenty of time to learn from the marvels of roman engineering still standing, at least according to the poster eclipse.

I was not trying to negate your argument just add to it.
Rome left Briton in 395 and St Patrick landed in Ireland in 432. Historians call the Dark ages as starting around the year 500 but I see it as happening locally when the Christians came in and put the lights out. Of course for all those centuries they were the ones writing the history so never acknowledged that they might be part of the problem.