1 THOUGHT ON “#165. TO CATCH A FALLING KNIFE” Simon Hodges on February 29, 2020 at 7:30 pm said: This is all about nCov and supply chains. Nothing to do with energy. The effects will be 10X worse than the GFC. Reply ↓ rogerglewis on February 29, 2020 at 7:45 pm said: Your comment is awaiting moderation. Agreed. There is something of the Problem of the Tool here. If the only tool one has is a Hammer then sooner or later all problems turn into Nails. https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2020/02/29/165-to-catch-a-falling-knife/comment-page-1/#comment-10321 https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2020/02/29/your-comment-is-awaiting-moderation-164-a-bolt-from-the-grey-posted-on-february-28-2020-why-business-as-usual-will-not-be-restored/ https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2020/02/29/165-to-catch-a-falling-knife/ You Made a comment about Eugenics on the SUrplus Energy Blog the other day. You might find this interesting. https://youtu.be/mJ7d8Q9Cy1I https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2019/12/23/over-population-paper-how-big-a-waste-paper-basket-ayers-quite-so-twofingers2brino-4pamphleteers-grubstreetjorno-wiki_ballot-financialeyes-iabato-sam-ge2019-roger-lewis-porthos-joebl/
https://youtu.be/mJ7d8Q9Cy1I

From 2005

 

It’s about far more than past energy use, a stocktaking and also a reconfiguration of the way Risk is weighted and the opportunity cost of ENergy Investment capital is required.
There are several scenarios which are possible going forward at the coming inflexion point. So-Called De-Growth is but one of those.

 

Ever had a wank ever had a wank ever had a Wankle Engine.Technology, Opportunity cost. Ideas whose time may have come again. Post Scarcity or Degrowth? Energy COst of Energy. Opportunity Cost of Energy. Part 2 More Notes

 rogerglewis  Uncategorized  February 29, 2020 24 Minutes

Dialogue With A Monetarist, “Both Read the Bible Day and Night but I read Black and You Read White.”

rogerglewis Uncategorized March 22, 2019 7 Minutes

Your Comment is awaiting Moderation.#164. A bolt from the grey Posted on February 28, 2020 WHY “BUSINESS AS USUAL” WILL NOT BE RESTORED

rogerglewis Uncategorized February 29, 2020 4 Minutes

At 10-43 this is the crucial point what is the purpose of the banks, what are the end goals or objectives of Banking or the wider financial system and how do we best regulate with those stated aims in the forefront. Excellent Video.

I have been trying to make a point regarding the opportunity cost of energy available for investment
this is the same point as applied to Basel 2 and Basel 3.

http://subprimeregulations.blogspot.com/2020/01/paul-volcker-valiantly-accepted-that.html

https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/?s=surplus+energy

 

https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2018/03/10/energy-returned-on-energy-invested-surplus-energy-economics-data-base-seeds-embodied-energy-circular-economy/

https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2018/03/06/121-interpreting-the-post-growth-economy/

1. That is a very useful summary and introduction to Surplus Energy Economics Tim.
   There is an online book here,
   http://www.withouthotair.com/Contents.html

   By the late Prof David MacKay

   He talks about the book here at Harvard,

   The Book is an easy read and the examples are very intuitive as they break back to the idea of how many 40 watt light bulbs different energy solutions break down as in per capita energy resources.

   http://www.withouthotair.com/cL/page_370.shtml

   There are some very good Sites which have well-embedded energy databases particularly in the Construction industry which uses 48% of global energy annually building and running domestic and commercial property.

   http://symposium.arch.tamu.edu/2017/ Project Summary: Buildings consume approximately 48% of global energy each year in their construction and operation alone adding proportionally to global carbon emission.

   The problems in Political Economy as it stands presently and the question of future Political Economy based upon future Energy realities are I think helpfully separated which is something Prof. David MacKay is very successful with, in his presentation of the question.

   The Problems are only weakly related with respect to future solutions and breaking the process into 3 parts is useful rather than lumping them all together. It is clear that the existing Form of Market economy and political economy is not able to solve the problem at stage 3 ( I.E Post 2050 post-Oil Economy)

   Stage 1 requires a reform of the existing paradigm which involves facing up to the broken debt-based money system. Pension provision, the sovereign debt crisis and Public debt crisis are all addressable and will see improvements even within the deteriorating Cost of energy inputs as a share of output. We could call this stage lets fix what we know is not working.

   Stage 2 covers the Post Financialised ( Big Bang Experiment) period to the oil running out in 2050.
   This requires a much more long-term investment horizon and complicating the energy mix by overstating the ”Climate Change question** seems to be counterproductive, again I like the way Prof David Mackay dealt with the question including stating the necessities of **Clean Coal and Nuclear”. In this stage, we will be implementing ideas previously barred due to the denial inherent in clinging to a failing system.

   Stage 3 Post 2050, This part is much easier than Stage 2 and stage 1, in my opinion, the myth-busting and levelling out inherent in solving the political problems at stage 1 and the challenge to vested interests in stage 2 are by far and away the largest obstacles to getting down to Brass tacks in my opinion.

   https://communityoperatingsystem.wordpress.com/2019/09/12/how-icnirp-agnir-phe-and-a-30-year-old-political-decision-created-and-then-covered-up-a-global-public-health-scandal/
2. 1 THOUGHT ON “#165. TO CATCH A FALLING KNIFE” Simon Hodges on February 29, 2020 at 7:30 pm said: This is all about nCov and supply chains. Nothing to do with energy. The effects will be 10X worse than the GFC. Reply ↓ rogerglewis on February 29, 2020 at 7:45 pm said: Your comment is awaiting moderation. Agreed. There is something of the Problem of the Tool here. If the only tool one has is a Hammer then sooner or later all problems turn into Nails. https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2020/02/29/165-to-catch-a-falling-knife/comment-page-1/#comment-10321 https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2020/02/29/your-comment-is-awaiting-moderation-164-a-bolt-from-the-grey-posted-on-february-28-2020-why-business-as-usual-will-not-be-restored/ https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2020/02/29/165-to-catch-a-falling-knife/ You Made a comment about Eugenics on the SUrplus Energy Blog the other day. You might find this interesting. https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2019/12/23/over-population-paper-how-big-a-waste-paper-basket-ayers-quite-so-twofingers2brino-4pamphleteers-grubstreetjorno-wiki_ballot-financialeyes-iabato-sam-ge2019-roger-lewis-porthos-joebl/

 

 

Doing more with less. Financialised capitalism is not very good at it. It is a question of adapting the Pricing of Markets in a token which reflects the resources available and their alternative potentials.
The “opportunity cost of Energy invested” as opposed to the energy cost of energy invested.
There are challenges transitioning from Oil to other fuels and also rather a lot of work to do on fuel cells. That said Materials Technology has transformed production capabilities and also many old Technologies have also been repurposed using 21st Century Materials.
Take Stirling engines just for starters. Take Heat Batteries and Heat pumps as another example. Seeds Tim is based upon one variable and that is the Energy cost of Energy as per the experience of the past 100 years. It is a massive assumption on the part of anyone to take the past 100 years as an indication of what the next 100 years has in store.
The Transition to the future, I am in the agreement, will take place over the next 50 years How it will look I have no idea I also know that it is not all bad news.
Bjorn Lomberg on the other perspective.

 

https://twitter.com/GrubStreetJorno/status/1232911968358617088

https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2020/01/24/163-tales-from-mount-incomprehension/#comments
rogerglewis
on February 27, 2020 at 2:47 pm said:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
There are challenges transitioning from Oil to other fuels and also rather a lot of work to do on fuel cells. That said Materials Technology has transformed production capabilities and also many old Technologies have also been repurposed using 21st Century Materials.
Take Stirling engines just for starters. Take Heat Batteries and Heat pumps as another example. Seeds Tim is based upon one variable and that is the Energy cost of Energy as per the experience of the past 100 years. It is a massive assumption on the part of anyone to take the past 100 years as an indication of what the next 100 years has in store.
The Transition to the future, I am in the agreement, will take place over the next 50 years How it will look I have no idea I also know that it is not all bad news.
Bjorn Lomberg on the other perspective.

 

https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2019/05/11/neo-liberalism-now-full-on-corporate-state-monopoly-cronycapitalism-fascism-brexit-brino-eumilitaryunion-extinctionrebellion-ngos-us-or-eu-fascism-take-your-pick-pdc-theslog-joeblob20/

https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2018/06/08/abundance-or-scarcity-more-with-less-or-less-with-more/

https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2018/06/07/gfc2-ephemeralisation-doing-more-with-less-bucky-fullmeister-and-circular-economy/

https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2018/06/07/the-wizard-of-oz-gives-gifts-lets-do-more-good-with-less-kakistocrats/

https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2020/01/24/163-tales-from-mount-incomprehension/

https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2020/02/28/164-a-bolt-from-the-grey/

 

https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2019/01/22/beyond-probability-actors-in-history/