Peak Oil is You

Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)

Page added on July 15, 2021

Bookmark and Share

Gail Tverberg : To Be Sustainable, Green Energy Must Generate Adequate Taxable Revenue

Gail Tverberg : To Be Sustainable, Green Energy Must Generate Adequate Taxable Revenue thumbnail

What allows any type of energy to be sustainable? I would argue that one of the requirements for sustainability is adequate production of taxable revenue. Company managements depend upon taxable revenue for many purposes, including funding new investments and paying dividends to shareholders. Governments depend upon taxable income to collect enough taxes to provide infrastructure and programs for their growing populations.

Taxable income is a major way that “net energy” is transferred to future investment and to the rest of the economy. If this form of net energy is too low, governments will collapse from lack of funding. Energy production will fall from lack of reinvestment. This profitability needs to come from the characteristics of the energy products, allowing more goods and services to be produced efficiently. This profitability cannot be created simply by the creation of more government debt; the rise in the price of energy is tied to the affordability of goods, particularly the goods required by low-income people, such as food. This affordability issue tends to put a cap on prices that can be charged for energy products.

It seems to me that Green Energy sources are held to far too low a standard. Their financial results are published after subsidies, making them look profitable when they really are not. This is one of the things that makes many people from the financial community believe that Green Energy is the solution for the future.

In this post, I will discuss these ideas further. A related issue is, “Which type of oil production fell most in the 2018-2021 period?” Many people had expected that perhaps high-cost energy production that would fall. Strangely enough, the production that fell most was that of OPEC oil exporters. These oil exporters often have a very low cost of energy production. The production of US oil from shale also fell.

If the ratio of Energy Return on Energy Investment (EROEI) is to be used as a measure of which type of energy best meets our needs, perhaps the list of items to be included in EROEI calculations needs to be broadened. Alternatively, more attention needs to be paid to unsubsidized taxable income as an indicator of net energy production.

[1] According to EIA data, world crude oil production hit a peak of 84.5 million barrels per day (bpd) in the fourth quarter of 2018. Production fell as low as 72.3 million bpd in the third quarter of 2020. Production rebounded to 75.4 million barrels of oil a day, still 9.1 million bpd below peak production in the 4th quarter of 2018.

Figure 1. Quarterly crude and condensate production, based on international data of the US Energy Information Administration.

This drop in oil production was unprecedented. It far exceeded the drop in oil production at the time of the Great Recession of 2008-2009. As of the first quarter of 2021, crude oil production was roughly at its level in 2011. It still has not rebounded very far.

[2] The biggest drop in crude oil production during this period was that of the cartel led by OPEC and Russia. United States’ oil production also fell during this period. Production of the Rest of the World, in total, was fairly flat.

Figure 2. Crude oil production through the first quarter of 2021 based on international data of the US Energy Information Administration.

The big concern of OPEC and Russia was that crude oil prices were too low to provide adequate tax revenue for the governments of these countries. This is especially an issue for countries with few other industries besides oil. These oil exporting countries tend to have large populations, with little employment besides government-sponsored projects. Nearly all food needs to be imported, so subsidies for food need to be provided if the many low-wage people are to be able to afford this food.

If oil prices are high, say $150 per barrel or higher in today’s dollars, it is generally fairly easy for governments to collect enough oil-related taxes. The actual cost of extraction is often very low for oil exporters, perhaps as little as $20 per barrel. The need for tax revenue greatly exceeds the direct expenses of extracting the oil. Companies can be asked to be pay as much as 90% of operating income (in this example, equal to $130 = $150 – $20 per barrel, probably only relating to exported oil) as taxes. The percentage varies greatly by country, with countries that have higher costs of production generally paying less in taxes.

Figure 3. Chart from 2013 showing “government take” as a percentage of operating income by Barry Rodgers Oil and Gas Consulting (website no longer available).

When oil companies are asked about their required price to break even, a wide range of answers is possible. Do they just quote the expense of pulling the oil from the ground? If so, a very low answer is possible. If shareholders are involved in the discussions, this is the answer that they would like to hear. Or do they give realistic estimates, including the taxes that their governments need? Furthermore, if the cost of extraction is rising, there needs to be enough profit that can be set aside to allow for the drilling of new wells in higher-cost areas, if production is to be maintained.

Because of the need for tax revenue, OPEC countries often publish Fiscal Breakeven Oil Prices, indicating how high the prices need to be to obtain adequate tax revenue for the exporting countries. For example, Figure 4 shows a set of Fiscal Breakeven Oil Prices for 2013 – 2014.

Figure 4. Estimate of OPEC breakeven oil prices, including tax requirements by parent countries, by APICORP.

If a country tries to maintain the same standard of living for its population as in the past, I would expect that the fiscal breakeven price would rise year after year. This would occur partly because the population of OPEC countries keeps rising and thus more subsidy is needed. The fiscal breakeven price would also tend to rise because the easiest-to-extract oil tends to be depleted first. As a result, new oil-related investments can be expected to have higher costs than the depleted investments they are replacing.

In fact, if a person looks at more recently published fiscal breakeven prices, they tend to be lower than the 2013-2014 breakevens. I believe that this happens because oil exporters don’t want to look desperate. They know that attaining such high prices is unlikely today. They hope that by using more debt and reducing the standard of living of their citizens, they can somehow get along with a lower fiscal breakeven price. This is not a long term solution, however. Unhappy citizens are likely to overturn their governments. Such a result could completely cut off oil supply from these countries.

[3] A cutback in oil production is not surprising for the OPEC + Russia group, nor for the United States, given the chronically low oil prices. The profitability was too low for all of these producers.

Figure 5. Inflation-adjusted historical average annual Brent oil price for 1965 through 2020 from BP’s Statistical Review of World Energy 2021. 12-Jul-2021 amount is the actual Brent spot oil price for that date.

Oil prices fell in late 2014. Fiscal breakeven prices calculated before that date likely gave a somewhat reasonable estimate of the needed prices for oil exporters to make an adequate profit, at that time. By early 2019, when the first decreases in oil production began, these countries were beginning to become fed up with chronically low oil prices.

It is interesting to note that Qatar, the country with the lowest breakeven price on Figure 4, decided to withdraw from OPEC effective January 1, 2019, rather than reduce its oil production. For Qatar, oil prices in late 2018 and early 2019 were close to adequate. Qatar mostly produces natural gas, rather than oil.

The decrease in US shale oil production reflects somewhat the same low profitability issue as OPEC + Russia exports, with an additional factor added. Besides low prices, there seems to be a well-spacing issue. There are reports that the spacing of shale wells gradually got closer and closer, until the closer spacing became counter-productive. The more closely spaced wells “cannibalized” the output from nearby wells. The extra drilling may also have released needed pressurization, reducing oil availability.

Such a problem would have been a difficult issue to pick up from EROEI analyses because there are not enough of these EROEI studies to see sudden changes. Figure 6 shows the timing of the drop in US oil production, relative to the drop in oil prices:

Figure 6. Monthly average crude oil and condensate production and prices for the United States excluding the Gulf of Mexico, based on US Energy Information Administration data. Oil prices are West Texas Intermediate spot prices, not adjusted for inflation. Amounts shown are through April 2021.

Figure 6 omits oil from the Gulf of Mexico, because its quantity tends to bounce around, especially when a hurricane hits. Because of this exclusion, the oil shown in Figure 6 reflects a combination of declining oil production from conventional oil wells plus (after about 2011) rising production from shale wells.

Figure 6 shows that production of oil from shale was developed during the 2011 to 2013 period, when oil prices were high. When oil prices suddenly fell in late 2014, shale producers suddenly found production very unprofitable. They cut back on production starting in April 2015. Shale production started rising again in 2017 after prices moved away from their extreme lows. Growth in oil production began to slow in late 2018, when oil prices again began to fall.

The big shut reduction in world oil demand associated with the COVID-19 epidemic began in the second quarter of 2020. Shale production fell in response to low oil prices in March through November of 2021. As of April 2021, production does not seem to have rebounded significantly. We have seen reports that workers were laid off, making it difficult to add new production. If, indeed, well-spacing had become too close, this may have played a role in the decision not to ramp up production again. It is quite possible that many drilled but uncompleted wells will permanently remain uncompleted because they are too close to other wells to be useful.

Based on this analysis, it seems likely that US oil production for 2021 will be lower than that for 202o. Ultimately, the lack of adequate profitability can be expected to bring US oil production down.

[4] There are some high-cost oil producers who continue to produce increasing amounts of oil.

Figure 7. Crude oil and condensate production for Canada and Brazil, based on international data of the US Energy Information Administration.

The keys to maintaining high-cost oil production seem to be

  • Large up front investments to make this production possible with little new investment
  • Governments that are not very “needy” in terms of revenue from oil taxes

Even with these considerations, having an unprofitable or barely profitable oil industry weakens a country. Neither Brazil nor Canada is doing very well economically in 2021. These countries will likely reduce new oil investment in the next year or two, if inflation-adjusted oil prices do not rise significantly.

[5] Somehow, “Green Energy” has been allowed to compete in the energy field with huge subsidies. If Green Energy is actually to be successful long-term, it needs to be profitable in the same way that fossil fuel energy needs to be profitable. If wind and solar are truly useful, they need to be very profitable, even without subsidies, so that they can support their governments with taxes.

There tends to be little recognition of the extent of subsidies for renewable energy. For example, allowing the electricity from wind turbines and solar panels to be put on the grid whenever it is generated is a huge subsidy. Such generation mostly substitutes for the coal or natural gas used by electricity-producing plants, rather than the electricity generated by these plants. The many reports we see that compare the cost of intermittent electricity generated by wind turbines and solar panels with the cost of dispatchable electricity generated by fossil fuels are simply misleading.

Furthermore, electricity generated by wind turbines and solar panels doesn’t need to be sufficiently profitable to pay for the much larger grid they require. The larger grid requirement occurs partly because the devices tend to be more distant from users, and partly because the transmission lines need to be sized for the maximum transmission required, which tends to be high for the variable production of renewables.

The lack of adequate of profitability of wind and solar on an unsubsidized basis strongly suggests that they are not really producing net energy, regardless of what EROEI calculations seem to indicate.

It might be noted that in past years, oil exporters have been accused of giving large energy subsidies to their oil producing companies. What these oil exporters have been doing is charging their their own citizens lower prices for oil products than the high (international) price charged to foreign buyers. Thus, high taxes were collected only on oil exports, not from local citizens. With the fall in oil prices in late 2014 (shown in Figures 5 and 6 below), this practice of differential pricing has largely disappeared.

“Oil subsidies” in the US consist of financial assistance to low income people in the US Northeast who continue to heat their homes with oil. These subsidies, too, have mostly disappeared, with lower oil prices and the availability of less expensive forms of home heating.

[6] It seems to me that an economy really has three different requirements:

  1. The total quantity of energy must be rising, at least as rapidly as population.
  2. The types of energy available must match the needs of current energy-producing devices, or there needs to be some type of transition plan to facilitate this transition.
  3. There must be enough “net energy” left over, both (a) to fund governments with taxes and (b) to fund any transition to different energy-consuming devices, if such a transition is required.

Thus, in order for a transition to Green Energy to really work, it must be extremely profitable on a pretax, unsubsidized basis, so that it can pay high taxes. The greater the need for a transition to different energy consuming devices, such as heat pumps for buildings and electric vehicles of many types, the greater the need for more net energy generated by Green Energy sources to help facilitate this transition.

High profitability for energy products is normally associated with a very low cost of energy production. Furthermore, the type of Green Energy available needs to be in a very useful form. In a sense, there are really two different energy transitions required:

  • The output of intermittent electricity devices must be brought up to grid standards, using a combination such as many long distance transmission, very substantial battery backup, and the use of many devices to provide the electricity with the precise characteristics it needs.
  • As mentioned above, if greater use of electricity is to be made, a transition to electric devices is required.

Both of these transitions will require significant quantity of energy (really net energy not used elsewhere in the system) to accomplish. If fossil fuel energy is being phased out, an increasing share of this net energy will need to come from the Green Energy sector by way of the tax system. Such as system will only work if the Green Energy sector is very profitable on a pre-tax basis.

[7] Figure 8 suggests that the world has a problem with low energy consumption per capita right now.

Figure 8. Energy consumption per capita for all energy source combined based on data from BP’s Statistical Review of Energy 2021.

There is a strong correlation between growth in total energy consumption per capita and how well the economy is doing. The slight downward slide in energy consumption per capita in 2019 indicates that the economy was already doing poorly in 2019. The huge downward shift in 2020 dwarfs the downward slide in 2009. My earlier research, looking back 200 years, indicates that low growth in energy consumption per capita is likely to lead to conflict among nations and collapses of governments. Epidemics are also more likely to spread in such periods, because greater wage and wealth disparity tends to occur when energy supplies are constrained.

Any shift away from fossil fuel energy to Green Energy will almost certainly mean a huge drop in world energy consumption per capita because the world doesn’t produce very much Green Energy. Such a drop in energy consumption per capita will be a huge problem, in itself. If the Green Energy sector doesn’t generate much taxable income without subsidies, this adds an additional difficulty.

[8] Conclusion: Examination of the EROEIs for various fuels, using calculations the way that they are performed today, gives inadequate information regarding whether a transition to another set of fuels is feasible.

Researchers need to be looking more at (a) the total quantity of energy produced and (b) the profitability of producing this energy. An economy is only possible because of profitable businesses, including energy businesses. A person cannot assume that energy prices will rise from today’s level because of scarcity. Today’s huge debt bubble is producing very high copper and steel prices, but it is not producing correspondingly high oil prices.

Heavily subsidized energy products look like they might be helpful, but there is little reason to believe this to be the case. If Green Energy products are truly producing net energy, we should expect this fact to be reflected in the unsubsidized profits that these products generate. In fact, if Green Energy products are are truly producing large amounts of net energy, they should be so profitable that businesses will be rapidly ramping up their production, even without subsidies or mandates.

our finite world

21 Comments on "Gail Tverberg : To Be Sustainable, Green Energy Must Generate Adequate Taxable Revenue"

  1. Theedrich on Fri, 16th Jul 2021 5:53 am 

    “Green Energy” will come from Democrat marijuana. Shumer and his accomplices now want to stupefy the U.S. populace yet more by providing them with nationwide-legalized consciousness-dimming drugs.  The Leftists can tax that, making it possible to float the economy on green dreaminess.  The Mexicans and other invading Latinos are helping them, sending in international crime organizations with lots of fentanyl-loaded venom.  The steep rise in American deaths from the narco industry will also reduce the need to send free money to keep people alive.  Great idea, Shumer!

    The slow erosion of American economic foundations, and the lies produced by Greeners and their perpetual motion machinery are second only to the bribery by the “pharmaceutical” industry and its huge lethal narcotics component.  Of course, the politicoes make sure not to know where their bribes are coming from.  They can also blame all of the slow deterioration on Trump, in line with all the attacks on him by every twisted retiree selling a book.  But flogging a dead horse will not save the economy, any more than distracting the boobs by calling Trump Attila the Hun.

    So we can expect more fun and games as our energy declines.  The future is not green.

  2. Biden's hairplug on Fri, 16th Jul 2021 7:33 am 

    “Great idea, Shumer!”

    I almost always agree with Theedrich en NEVER with the likes of Shumer (don’t take it from me, take it from apneaman)… but here is an occasion I have to agree with the self-styled green heeb.

    Being on a site called “peak-oil”, I would love to know how Theedrich wants to secure energy supply in the future, if oil supply will be receding.

    Don’t expect an elaborate answer. Americans can’t think of a life beyond oil and gas.

    And with all these “new Americans” around, I would be skeptical, too, that the US can generate the required innovation impulse for the transition to succeed.

    No worries, we Europeans will show you how to do it, “after the break”.

  3. Duncan Idaho on Fri, 16th Jul 2021 10:03 am 

    Could you agree with him?

  4. FamousDrScanlon on Fri, 16th Jul 2021 12:56 pm 

    I get a big kick reading Americans write articles about a future that won’t be there.

    I haven’t read Gail in awhile. Is she still suggesting praying to your nonexistent sky daddy as the 1 & only response to climate change? Well at least she has a plan.

  5. Biden’s hairplug on Fri, 16th Jul 2021 2:35 pm 

    “I get a big kick reading Americans write articles about a future that won’t be there.“

    I get an even bigger kick from the knowledge that there won’t be a future for your ilk either. Please don’t take it personal.

  6. Biden’s hairplug on Fri, 16th Jul 2021 3:11 pm 

    Britain facing the serious prospect of food shortages:

    Even the pro-Brexit media begin to admit that the UK has a little problem brewing here.

    Mr Barnier is a skillful negotiator.

    Sooner or later, England will return to the Common Market, sadder and wiser.

  7. Duncan Idaho on Fri, 16th Jul 2021 5:20 pm 

    Yep, Gail is still a Cabbage For Christ–

    The Fat Boy’s eyes?

    “There’s nothing there but rank evil, soul-crushing emptiness, and half-slurped McNugget sauces.:

  8. FamousDrScanlon on Fri, 16th Jul 2021 5:53 pm 

    Sure clog your 7 decades & running prediction. Any day now…..again.

    Is that it clog? Your entire life spent hating & waiting for someone (not you) to ‘pay back’ the Jew & eliminate your 5 mile long hit list of unworthy subhumans?

    What would you do without the Super Jews to blame for all your personal, tribal & national failures?

    Lemme guess, if it wasn’t for the Jews interfering you would have been a super successful business man, have a beautiful wife, served 2 terms as PM of the Netherlands & would currently be serving as the Netherlands Ambassador to the US & you’d be beloved by Germans & considered as one of them.

    What a pathetic tiny little man you are sad clog:( No one could cause you more pain than you’ve cause yourself. Being alive is your torture & only death will free you, since the Super Jews ain’t going anywhere & neither are the folks on your hit list.

    It’s you & your ilk who are on the endangered species list clog. Y’all are going bye bye if you don’t get in line. The world rejects you.

    I must thank you & your ilk though for all the entertaining antics these last few years.

    I look forward to some more Darwin Award winners from your tribe amusing me.

    Speaking of being amused, I sometimes drop by American author & cultural historian Morris Berman’s blog – DARK AGES AMERICA. Morris & his regulars have plenty to say about your ever shrinking tribe:

    “It is w/some sadness that I hafta report a relative absence of antisemitic trollfoon attacks. I guess those guys just finally ran outta steam. Go figure. But I confess, I miss them. They are so stupid. I usta enjoy deleting them unread. Well, perhaps other blogs are now the recipients of their cutting-edge intellects. C’est la vie.”

    “Still very little from antisemitic trollfoons. I’m gonna hafta start calling these guys the Limp Dick Club.”

    “The relative silence of the antisemitic trollfoons continues. I think these guys’ testicles never descended. They are reduced to a random hit here and there, every so often, wh/I don’t even read. No testes, and limp dicks. Not exactly a major threat.”

    “On a sad note, the antisemitic trollfoons have literally disappeared. Perhaps they figured out I was baiting them; or that I wasn’t reading their posts. Who knows, really? But I miss them, they are so stupid. Let me try this: Pathetic antisemites! You have no testes, and your very small dicks are limp! You are cowards, hiding under rocks. I release excrement upon your heads, you losers! The Jews will replace you; make no mistake abt it.”


    This is the Blog for MORRIS BERMAN, the author of “Dark Ages America”. It includes current publications and random thoughts about U.S. Foreign Policy, including letters and reactions to publications from others. A cultural historian and social critic, MORRIS BERMAN is the author of “Wandering God” and “The Twilight of American Culture”. Since 2003 he has been a visiting professor in sociology at Catholic University of America in Washington, DC. Feel free to write and participate.

    “I release excrement upon your heads, you losers! The Jews will replace you; make no mistake abt it.”

    Enjoy the new blog clog.

  9. Doc Rich on Fri, 16th Jul 2021 8:05 pm 

    I couldn’t agree more with your well written comments. Have to admit that I didn’t read the comments section for quite some time until today, due to the mindless hatred and relentless cursing that went on. Wonder why there is no editing of such comments on this site. Keep up the good work.

  10. Biden's hairplug on Sat, 17th Jul 2021 3:00 am 

    “Sure, your 7 decades & running prediction. Any day now… again.”

    Not 7 decades, less than 7 years.

    By the end of 2014, two years before Trump (and Brexit), I first began to understand that the US was on a path of unraveling:

    Two years before the eloquent black CNN anchor van Jones talked about a “white lash” at the election night:

    By the end of the Trump presidency, I could collect endless amount of videos like these:

    “The Unraveling of the United States”

    I never gave a date of when this was supposed to happen. On top of that, I included the possibility “40-60” that the US deep state would prevail over white America after all and establish a neo-USSR (your wet dream) in Anglosphere:

    “Which Future World?”

    What I am pretty certain of is that the US empire aka the West is finished and that a split between Euros and Anglos will happen this decade, greatly enabled by Brexit. I think that the US, after huge losses in Iraq, Syria and now in Afghanistan, will face another misfortune in East-Asia. I do think that China will retake Taiwan this decade, like they retook Hong-Kong, without serious resistance from the West. I do NOT expect a major shooting war over Taiwan, just a fait accompli (for North-Americans like you, that is Danish and means done deal) and a new Cold War (if the US remains in one piece).


    I couldn’t agree more with your well written comments.

    apneaman talking to himself, demanding censoring, like all good commies do. He feels cornered… because he is.

    Next TalmudTurk posts a Morris Berman as a proof that “jews are going to replace us”, the same Berman who predicts:

    “Why The American Empire Was Destined To Collapse, Nomi Prins Interviews Morris Berman”

    You’re losing it, apneaman, you’re getting confused and all. That’s OK, you are mentally “unraveling”, just like the political and social environment around you.

  11. Biden's hairplug on Sat, 17th Jul 2021 6:05 am 

    Makati loves to imagine that the Philippines will take sides with his beloved Chinese. Pure wishful thinking.

    Even the Chinese themselves know better.

    “South China Sea code of conduct talks ‘may end in stalemate’ as tensions rise”

  12. Biden's hairplug on Sat, 17th Jul 2021 6:19 am 

    So much for “strategic ambiguity”:

    “US line on Taiwan unreasonable”
    By Lindell Lucy

    On July 6, US National Security Council Indo-Pacific Coordinator Kurt Campbell said: “We do not support Taiwan independence.”

    Campbell’s statement was confusing, immoral, anti-democratic and disappointingly common.

    The US has given up on Afghanistan, Nord Stream 2 and clearly now on Taiwan. The US will not defend Taiwan militarily… because they can’t and the US knows it.

    So what IS US strategy in East-Asia?

    How about provoking/encouraging China to retake Taiwan and the US, in response, will renew anti-Chinese alliances in East-Asia, notably Japan, Vietnam and the Philippines.

    And use the occasion to start a Cold War against China, a war that will be mostly economic.

  13. Biden's hairplug on Sat, 17th Jul 2021 7:24 am 

    In France, even some jews are “far-right extremists” and they want to become right-wing, racialist leaders:

    “French right shaken by extremist commentator’s likely presidential run”

    Difference between the EU and the US: in Europe the imported darkies are muzzies, where in North-America, you have blacks, mestizos and Asians. Muzzies HATE jews. That’s an interesting detail, possibly decisive for European identitarians. We only have to let the Allah-bots do the dirty work for us, we’ll potentially.

    And they are all pro-Putin:

    “Zemmour: “The USA-China war is not ours””

    “It’s Putin’s World”

    How the Russian president became the ideological hero of nationalists everywhere

    It is likely that Zemmour will run and as such split the right-wing vote and enhances a 2nd term for Macron, which is OK.

    In somewhat unrelated news, Nigel Farage has announced they he wil inform us about an immanent career change of his at 17:00 pm. Some expect him to become a prominent media figure, with daily presence.

    In England, Holland and Spain, Covid is outright exploding:

    “Covid cases will stay high for MONTHS after passing 100,000 in two weeks and a new lockdown may be needed by September, say experts as ‘Zero Covid’ scientists accuse UK of ‘endangering the world'”

    To top it off, signs are, among them from one of the best vaccinated countries in the world, Israel, that Pfizer vaccines are hardly effective against the Delta and Beta variant. Oh, and that the jab needs t be renewed every 6 months to remain effective.

    It’s going to be one huge disaster. For the West, but not for China, that did everything right.

    How to beat Covid: no-Covid strategy, that is:

    – 4 weeks brutal lockdown, curfew
    – borders closed, no tourism, for a year or more
    – very prudent opening, with lots of testing, constant on the look-out for infected en put them in quarantaine
    – no travel, cafés, stadiums, theater, nothing
    – face masks
    – 2 meter social distancing
    – government propaganda for losing weight and healthy living, without alcohol, sugar, smoking, fast-food and with fasting

    China did a lot of that and is past Covid. They will have their borders closed until at least 2022.

    Kiss globalism goodbye.

  14. FamousDrScanlon on Sat, 17th Jul 2021 3:45 pm 

    The limits of green idealism

    “Cynics will no doubt point to the coincidence of the UK government announcing a “plan” to decarbonise transport just as preparations for the COP26 conference are gathering pace.”

    “While the plan is doomed to failure, its announcement provides two key insights into government thinking and philosophy which help us understand how this is going to play out. The first – and easiest – of these is that the government approach is techno-utopian. What do I mean by this? The plan provides no serious attempt to curb carbon emissions in the only way currently possible – to cut back on our use of fossil fuels, with the most profligate users cutting back the most. Rather, we are treated to a raft of supposedly “over-the-horizon” technologies which will magically save the day without anyone having to take a hit to their standard of living.”

    “Electrify” transport – it’s all the rage.

    Too bad electrifying won’t fill pot holes or do multi million dollar repairs on tens of thousands of structurally deficient bridges.

    See that condo in Flordia? That’s what’s happening, in slo-mo, to great parts of America’s transportation infrastructure.

    40 years – now you know. Now you know how many years of irresponsible can kicking (deferment) it takes to push infrastructure past the point of no return.

    It’s band aids and/or abandonment until doomsday. They’ll be no 2nd infrastructure build out or overhaul.

    The End of the Industrial Age is Set in Concrete

    “Now the bad news. Concrete has a life span. Salt, water and heat degrade it until at some point it can no longer be the road or the bridge or the high rise or the dam it once was. If nothing is done to replace or repair it, it fails. And people die.

    Now the really bad news. Most of the infrastructure of the United States is made of concrete, and most of that concrete is at the end of its life span. If you want to see what that looks like, go to Surfside, Florida and look at the pile of rubble that used to be the Champlain Towers. The pile of rubble that demonstrates perfectly the nature of the rapidly approaching concrete crisis.

    According to the American Society of Civil Engineers:

    Nearly half of America’s 617,000 bridges are 50 years old, or older, and 46,000 of them are structurally deficient.
    40% of the country’s highways are rated in poor or mediocre condition. Many of them in urban situations are impossible to close down in order to rebuild them.
    2,300 dams rated as high hazard — meaning that any failure would be catastrophic — are also rated as deficient.

    Which brings us to the really, really bad news. There is no logical way that the local, state or federal governments in this or any other country are going to find the political will to raise and spend the money necessary to fix this problem. For half a century and more, especially since the advent of the Reagan Era, the standard operating procedure has been to kick the can down the road. Now both the can and the road are just about used up.”

  15. The Dear Leader Speaks on Sun, 18th Jul 2021 12:33 am 

    Theedrich, dear, your increasingly looney-tunes memes are becoming oh so tiresome that they no longer even garner a reaction, lol.

  16. makati1 on Sun, 18th Jul 2021 2:02 am 

    Biden’s/Cloggie,it is YOU who live in a fantasy world. But then, drugs will do that, I guess.

    Who would know better what is happening in the SCS than someone who lives by it, not 8,000 miles away?

    That ref is old stuff. That CofC has been under discussion by ASEAN for over 8 years. Nothing new there.

  17. makati1 on Sun, 18th Jul 2021 2:11 am 

    The…Theedrich does not have to get a response to be correct. I may not agree 100% with his view of Amerika, but it is the closest to reality that I have seen in a long time. Amerika is going down the shitter. It is a drugged up, dumbed down, brainwashed group of spineless serfs being controlled by psychopaths. Can you imagine Russia or China having a senile, dementia case running the country? He should be in a nursing home, not the White house.

  18. makati1 on Thu, 22nd Jul 2021 5:28 pm 

    Another day of watching the West commit suicide.

    Unbelievable events happening every day, pulling the West even farther down the shitter.

    There seems to be a race to the bottom by the UK, Australia, the US and the rest of the EU.

    The PlanDEMic is not Covid, but mass insanity.

    Oh well. No great loss. Pass the popcorn.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *