I
recently took a trip to the Canadian Rockies to enjoy the pure, spectacular pleasure of Mother Nature's creations as she meant them. Ski the glaciers. Spot moose. Or whatever people do up there.


I
recently took a trip to the Canadian Rockies to enjoy the pure, spectacular pleasure of Mother Nature's creations as she meant them. Ski the glaciers. Spot moose. Or whatever people do up there.
Posted by NBW 0 comments
Labels: Economics, Energy, Intelligent Development, Talk Amongst Yourselves, The Environment, Travel
Posted by NBW 0 comments
Labels: Talk Amongst Yourselves, The Environment, Travel
My second-ever blog post talked about what I thought was wrong and right with China. Eighteen months later I visited the country for the first time and posted a follow-up blog based on what I saw.
Now, more than 3 and a half years later, they've made incredible and undeniable progress, as we all knew they would ... It's the old "damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead!" Unfortunately, those torpedoes are bigger, more numerous, and closer than ever before. Every day, with every move, a few more torpedoes crash into the Chinese hull. From time to time, they wander into storms and scrape reefs, but for now their charge is relentless, most visibly over the upcoming weeks as we all watch their Olympics. We will ooh! and aah! and some will whisper "they've beat us!"
But hold! Each impact, scrape, and squall takes its toll. We need look no further than Newtonian Law (applied to Economics) to know that SS China's rate of progress necessarily and permanently slows every time it runs across resistance. Each battle scar makes the craft slightly less hydro-dynamic. At some point, the Chinese people will tire of the turbulence and demand a smoother ride. Eventually, they'll realize that they need to modernize and reinforce their craft to make it long-lasting. All of these will inevitably slow their progress.
At the end of this blog, you'll find a table of the main torpedoes currently in the water and pinging. I list what's wrong and what's right with their response to each over the last few years.
As I've said before, it will take China a hundred years to fully recover from their current barrage-laden charge, to repair and upgrade their craft, and to find the safe, stable, deep and open waters where "We" (the US, Japan, and Europe) spend most of our time. We've been through the gauntlet already. We've forged much new territory and it has never been a smooth ride. Today, our people want a cautious hand at the wheel in order to foresee and prevent disturbances. We want a sure financial return on our investment. Plus, we want low costs (financial, political, ecological, and human). All of which explain why we no longer have China's appetite for showing off.
Chinese may think they can "control" their way to a permanently elevated cruise speed. Millions of ex-Communist technocrats have found that they can apply old Marx and Engels to a concept very de rigeur in Western business: performance metrics and control. This has been employed to tremendous fanfare in preparation for the Olympics ... and also to impressive effect. Today, those directing the Chinese economic ship are not in it for the money, but for the power and the growth.
At some point the populace will demand a bigger and more assured share of the spoils. Maybe even a say in how things are done. Someday, China's government will have to start listening to their people and considering the human side of their choices ... So far, they've shown their tone-deafness in this area. No wonder: these are "softer" criteria. It's tough to measure, control, and set targets for national unity or happiness. ISO has no international standard for maximization of human potential ... yet these are all critical once the voice of the people must be considered.
What are these soft criteria? I'm giving a stratospheric view of very human-level concepts. Let's swoop down and get a little more concrete with a few very human tales:
Posted by NBW 0 comments
Labels: Asia, Economics, Exchange Rates, Governmental Ineffectiveness, Industrializing Countries, Performance Metrics, Politics, Societal Growing Pains, Sports, The Environment, Tyrants
I guess Mother Earth isn't so happy with this summer's lack of global warming ... earthquake in China, then one in California, now another one in China ... oh, and I flew over mount St. Helens yesterday ... the smoke/steam cloud coming out of her must have been 100 miles long.
A while back, I read anecdotal evidence that geological shifts often have impacts on diametrically opposing sides of the globe (ahem ... China/Cali). Now that China has taken it's turn ... is Cali in for another shake-up?
Posted by NBW 0 comments
Labels: Talk Amongst Yourselves, The Environment
Recently I saw the following chart (left) in the Economist's special report on The Future of Energy. Last year I did some research and drew up these charts in support of my Power blog (right 2 charts). Thanks, Economist for painting this interesting historical picture to queue up my forecasts.
In their chart, what strikes me as most interesting is the speed with which we have been able to switch from one source of energy to another. The shift from wood to coal was halfway complete within 3 decades. We shifted from 3/4 of energy from coal to 1/4 in a single generation (thanks to the increase in oil demand from the exploding popularity of cars).
There's plenty of hard evidence that the rate of technological progress continues to accelerate unabated and with no end in sight. To me, this lends credibility to the argument I've been trying to make of late: the current media hand-wringing is largely misdirected angst. I'm quite confident will be able to shift our energy sources even in the face of unstoppable and dramatic increases in demand ... all before Armageddon is upon us. No, $5 gas is not Armageddon. Jeez.
The Economist seems equally confident that we'll make the necessary changes in the appropriate (yes, "measured and responsible" is an appropriate pace for things) way and time frame. To paraphrase: Don't look now but it's already happening. One of the main sources for their special report, Geoffrey Carr, said it best in a blog at guardian.co.uk: "Alternative energy technologies are proliferating rapidly. And it is big bad business that is making it happen."
Chalk up another one for capitalism to save the day. The Watermelons (aka Green Party) and their type have been thrashing for half a century to absolutely zero effect, save giving environmentalism a bad name.
Source of first chart: BP via Economist.com
Posted by NBW 0 comments
Labels: Business, Economics, Energy, Technology, The Environment
The future of energy is resolving itself to a new level of clarity. We certainly need to work on the "zoom" to see exactly the mechanisms that will get us to the future, but the horizon is now visible.
To state the obvious, the energy of the future is electricity. Other mechanisms will also coexist (see below), but not predominantly. Everything from power plants to factories to cars to home heat will become electric. Because of this demand will skyrocket from the current 500 exajoules of primary energy per year to perhaps 2000 EJ by this time next century. So-called "energy intensity" (energy production/economic output) will continue to decline in industrialized countries, but overall demand will continue to increase. In the 3rd world, unfortunately, both will rocket skyward for a half century. Conservation will slow the growth perhaps but even the most asceticly stringent views could not suggest that we will reduce overall demand as billion after billion people move from subsistence to industry.
For the next 20 to 40 years, new energy generation will be nuclear. It's there, it's safe, it's cheap. This will give breathing room for R&D to successfully develop methods of harvesting energy from a very broad range of geological sources (see below). Somewhere around 2050, we'll wake up to find that geo sources account for more than 50% of total generation. At that point, the only talk about carbon- or nuclear-sourced generation will be how fast these dinosaurs can be killed with economic efficiency.
The bigger story is energy sourced from the earth and the sky. In a sense, this is the next evolution in conservation, since currently the universe wastes (well, expends anyway) inconceivable amounts of energy. Our long-term focus will be on harnessing these joules. Or would that be jewels? To quote Wikipedia (whence all good info eventually alights) the amount of solar energy intercepted by Earth every minute is greater than the energy produced by fossil fuels each year. The earth's core alone generates an incredible 140,000,000 EJ a year. It is estimated that this could easily translate into potential of 5,000 harnessed EJ of geothermal energy per year using currently-existing technologies.
Let me put this overall theory into pictures. As these are simply theories, the numbers are indicative.
Power Sources (first tab) ... and estimates (second tab):
Further reading:
http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/006/AD550E/ad550e00.pdf
http://secondlawoflife.wordpress.com/category/power-generation/
http://ies.lbl.gov/iespubs/42949.pdf
http://web.mit.edu/space_solar_power/
Posted by NBW 0 comments
Labels: Economics, Energy, Technology, The Environment
Game-time, forward-looking thoughts on business, politics, technology, economics, and humanity ... from my personal viewpoint ... with no apologies.