Energy and politics are a terrible mix

I've felt this way for years, but it's pretty appalling that energy production and sale, and government policy that affects it, is at just the right level of complexity that it becomes incredibly easy for self serving (and sometimes ridiculous) ideas about it to spread because of the mere veneer of plausibility.    For example:

 

And look, I don't understand it at all well either - I just get by on reading a range of material and getting a sense of who is talking more sense about it.

What we need is someone who is seen as a good communicator who can explain the complexities and what is possible and reasonable.   This is part of my "it's time for specifics" arguments too - as far as the plan ahead for replacing coal and gas with alternatives.   Rather than just waiting for the way it pans out now - with intermittent, ad hoc-ish, announcements like this:

Rio Tinto has called for proposals to develop large-scale wind and solar power in Central and Southern Queensland to power its aluminium assets, help meet its climate change ambitions and further encourage renewable development and industry in the region.

The approach, which is through a formal market Request for Proposals (RFP), is intended to support the development of multiple new wind and solar power projects that can, in parallel with firming solutions, start supplying power to Rio Tinto’s Gladstone assets through the Queensland grid by 2030.

Or this:

While on the topic of future energy, John Quiggin's article on nuclear in Australia seemed clear and comprehensible.   But his political allegiances (now, basically "Green") mean he's not going to be seen as a trusted national communicator more broadly on the future of electricity generation and markets, either.   I'm not sure whether he agrees with my concern about the lack of specifics, too.  I should go over to his blog and ask him, I guess!

I didn't even watch the show, but find this funny

On Twitter, David Roberts is talking about looking at episodes from the early seasons of Game of Thrones, and noting how good they were compared to the (apparently) shockingly terrible later seasons - especially the last.

Someone helpfully added this graphic illustration, which I find amusing:

 

 

When technology pushes physics

Here's a lengthy review of a book that concentrates on the development of the telegraph cable in the 19th century, and how these were up and operating before the science of electromagnetism was understood.

I hadn't really thought of this before, but the fact that 19th century technology was preceding the scientific theory behind it has been the theme of the author over several books:

 Hunt’s first book, The Maxwellians, shows how Maxwell’s disciples altered the form of his theory of electromagnetism so significantly after his death that the Maxwell’s equations taught today were unknown to Maxwell himself.¹ In his second book, Pursuing Power and Light: Technology and Physics from James Watt to Albert Einstein, Hunt examines nineteenth-century physics in the glow of nineteenth-century technology.² He shows that, just as Maxwell—and, later, his disciples—pioneered electromagnetic field theory only after telegraph wires already lined the countryside, the science of thermodynamics was developed only after steam engines were already widespread.

Hunt has now published a third volume, Imperial Science: Cable Telegraphy and Electrical Physics in the Victorian British Empire.³ It marries the electrical history of The Maxwellians to the underlying thesis of Pursuing Power—that science is pushed along by technology just as often as it pulls technology ahead.

Interesting!

When progressives go too far

I've read two articles inspired, mainly, by the recall election of the San Francisco District Attorney who seems to be the key one to blame for the rise in crime in the city.

The first appeared in the Atlantic, and seems to be written by a lesbian SF native, who certainly grew up with tolerance to the city's long standing quirks (such as public nudity in parts of it).   Here it is:  How San Francisco Became a Failed City.

The second one is by Noah Smith, who also lives there now.  His essay is broader and covers other aspects where he thinks progressives are facing some well deserved pushback:  The year we all became reactionaries.   

He doesn't cover the trans wars, and seems reluctant to dip his toe into that issue:  but as I keep saying, I reckon the progressive attitude that "there's nothing to see here" in the matter of trans in sports is not going to win in the culture wars.   

Economies of scale, and Mars

Paul Krugman talks about how even a million people living on Mars (as Elon Musk has envisaged) would not really make for an economy of the type we have come to enjoy on Earth.  He explains, with an example I hadn't heard of:

...in the modern world there are often huge economies of scale in production. These economies of scale make it efficient to supply the entire world market for some goods from only a handful of locations — sometimes just a single location — with international trade delivering those goods to customers in other countries.For example, a recent shortage of semiconductor chips — which seems, finally, to be easing — has drawn attention to the role of photolithography machines, which use light to etch microscopic circuits on silicon wafers. (Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.) The world market for these it turns out, is dominated by a single firm in the Netherlands, ASML, which has a complete monopoly on the latest generation of machines, which use extreme ultraviolet light to make circuits even more microscopic.

So how many factories does ASML have assembling these cutting-edge machines? One. (It has other factories producing subsystems.)

These economies of scale mean that no one country can reasonably produce the full range of goods required to operate a modern, high-technology economy. International trade is essential, and more essential the smaller the economy — which is why Canada is far more dependent on imports than the United States, Belgium far more dependent than Germany, and so on....

Now, given access to world markets, even small countries can have full access to the benefits of modern technology; life in Luxembourg is pretty good. But unless we actually invent the Epstein Drive or something, the realities of transportation costs mean that Musk’s hypothetical Mars colony would have to be largely self-sufficient, cut off from the rest of the solar system economy. And it wouldn’t have enough people to pull that off with anything like a modern standard of living.

As I said, I see Musk on Mars as a teachable moment, an unintended thought experiment that helps remind us of the positive aspects of international trade. Yes, there are downsides to globalization, especially to rapid change that can disrupt whole communities. But you really wouldn’t want to live in a world without extensive international trade. And you really, really wouldn’t want to live on another planet, cut off from the globalization we’ve created on this one.

 

 

Culture war trumps children's lives

I have said many times, I really do not like Matthew McConaughey as an actor, but I respect him for taking steps to try to get some modest gun law changes through Congress.  But look how pathetic Fox News responds:

 Never let the culture wars go to waste, hey.   (And anyway, it's not as if McConaughey appears in trashy, violent movies.  Just dramas and the occasional comedies that I don't like because he is in them.)  

Another thing - look at this handy chart by Pew in 2021 that give the details of how much the American public values certain gun law proposals:

If only the public would get out and aggressively vote Democrat, the country would get laws that a substantial majority actually want....

Keeping things in perspective

For all of the talk of increasing electricity bills in Australia, I note that this month's bill for me (household of 3 adults) is $147 - a bit higher than last month, probably due to the number of times wet weather has necessitated the use of the clothes dryer.

According to websites I just looked at, this is a pretty average household price.  

But what about energy rich (and often Republican controlled) American states?   According to this website, they range from $80 a month to $150, with an average of around $111 a month.  But convert that to AUD, and you get - $153 average.  (The more expensive American states - and some seem to be Republican too - of $150 a month works out to $207 AUD.)  

Now, to make a fair comparison, we cook on a stove top with bottled gas (one 9 lt bottle seems to last 2 to 3 months), but a replacement gas bottle is still are costing under $30.   So I probably have another $150 or so in gas expenses, per year, or about $12 a month extra in non-electric "utility" costs.   

My point is:   for all of the talk of "soaring" gas and electricity costs coming our way, if you want to compare our cost of electricity with the "land of the free" (which has multiple power sources, including nuclear)  - we're not doing too bad.   Pretty comparable, really, but you wouldn't get that impression when reading the media.

Next up:  don't get me started on people who don't like to switch what they eat when there's a temporary price rise due to floods and other factors.   Yes, a $5.50 iceberg lettuce is expensive - but a butter leaf one in the same supermarket is still selling for $3.    (I just checked!)  Seriously, iceberg lettuce is a bit crap anyway, save for a very small number of dishes.   But if they are expensive for a time, just avoid them, it's not going to hurt to eat another type of lettuce.

There is nearly always something that is still good, seasonal, value in the shops.  I've noticed that potatoes and apples (and eggplants) are still cheap and plentiful.  Sure, it's a pity if you want to use tomatoes at the moment, but they'll come down in price again soon enough.   If you normally use them in a casserole, a can of crushed tomatoes from Italy is still ridiculously cheap and serves the same purpose.

More fantastic American administration

Another story of terrible American administration, this time at their airport.  

An Australian traveller was denied entry to the US, cavity searched, sent to prison alongside criminals and subsequently deported 30 hours after arriving, due to a little-known entry requirement for the US.

This part is the key problem: 

Dunn said he had since suffered panic attacks over his detention and called on Dfat to clearly advertise the entry rule on its Smartraveller website so others can avoid his experience.

US government websites explaining eligiblity for the visa waiver program, which Smartraveller advises Australians to consult, do not mention the specific entry rule that resulted in Dunn being deported.

 

An accurate take

 

The American criminal law system seems kind of 3rd world

This reminds me of the recent publicity given to people in the US wrongly arrested for "stealing" hire cars that they actually returned.    I posted briefly about it here.

This guy's story seems incredible - and again, a large part of the problem seems to be the way people can be arrested in one state and held for many days not knowing what the charge (from another state) is really about.

I just don't imagine that happening to anything like the same extend in Australia.   Fewer states is a good thing, I think.

Warped priorities

As for this related news:

 Elon Musk has a "right not to consummate" his acquisition of Twitter and a "right to terminate the merger agreement," according to a letter from his lawyers to the Twitter general counsel Vijaya Gadde sent Monday morning.

he should just pay the billion dollar termination fee and walk away.   It's very clear he didn't think it through, and/or didn't read the contract (with its apparent waiver of due diligence) carefully enough.

 

A complicated aspect of climate change

There's a twitter thread that's worth a read, even if it is still a little unclear on what it might mean for climate on land around the world:

 

Someone in comments asks this:

It all makes a mockery of having any confidence about the economic effect of climate change in the long term.   

Update:  here's the easier to follow summary by Prof England at The Conversation.

I wouldn't even bother with nuclear submarines, actually

 

How to look competent

 Hilariously, Currency Lad posted after the election that Penny Wong's sexuality and serious demeanour would mean she would go over like a lead balloon with socially conservative nations in the region (Fiji, etc.)

In fact, the optics of all of her meetings have been extremely impressive, with nary a leader frowning and saying "but you're a lesbian!"

Perhaps CL needs to re-evaluate his political judgement?  Ha ha ha.  As if.  It's yearning for a DLP style government and 1950's social mores forever, as far as he's concerned.

Another significant double slit experiment?

This is interesting.  The headline sums it up:

Neutrons In The Double-Slit Experiment Really Do Individually Take Both Paths

Here's another article explaining it, at Science Daily. 

And this is from the "discussion" section of the paper itself:

It should be emphasized that all results are completely
consistent with standard quantum theory. The conclusion that
particles can be physically delocalized between paths in which
no strong interactions occur and that the localization or delo-
calization is decided by a measurement that takes place after
the particles have propagated along the paths is a possibility
inherent in the paradoxical aspects of quantum superpositions.
In the present paper, we demonstrated that standard quantum
theory predicts precise and specific effects of the presence of
a particle in a path, even when the particle only undergoes a
very weak interaction on its way though the interferometer.

Now, this reminds me: back in 2017 I spotted on arXiv a Chinese paper that I thought sounded significant, regarding the paths of photons in a double slit experiment.   (It was pretty memorable for the inclusion of a very Chinese dragon illustration!)  Yet, I don't think anyone - like, no pop science site or Youtubing physicist - ever commented on it.

But now that I re-read it - I think it was basically arguing the same thing as this neutron experiment.

Maybe I should drop a line to Sabine Hossenfelder and ask her to discuss both experiments!

Now that's a headline you don't see every day...

Especially from Singapore!:

Man attacked with 20cm tactical harpoon in his back at Ming Arcade

 

How self-abasing can he get?

I missed this from last week:

Sky News host James Morrow has blamed the poor police response during the Texas school shooting on the left’s demonisation of “masculine virtues”.

“I don’t want to make it political, but it is coming from the left to de-mythologise heroes, to take heroes down a peg and say: ‘don’t be heroic’,” Mr Morrow said.

“And also, let’s be really frank about it, to take down masculine virtues.

“These masculine virtues of manliness and protection have also been taken down by the left.

“It’s the same sickness that produces the shooting.”

On being optimistic enough to have children

I strongly agree with the argument set out by Ezra Klein in the New York Times:  climate change is a very serious and urgent issue, but it is nonetheless lacking perspective to think that it is such a dire problem that adults who would otherwise like to have kids should decide not to have any.

Hurt ego

I saw that Tim Wilson was trending on Twitter, and found out that this is why (from The Age yesterday):

Wilson, who before parliament was a policy director at the free-market think tank the Institute of Public Affairs, and a human rights commissioner, plans to go hiking in Yosemite National Park with his husband Ryan. He also plans to set up his own climate and energy advisory business, utilising his experience as a junior minister for industry, energy and emissions reduction.

“I’m very open about the journey that I’ve gone through, from foetal position crying on Sunday morning through to seeing a psychologist yesterday,” Wilson told an energy efficiency conference in the week after his electoral defeat.

There is, shall we say, not an awful lot of sympathy for Ego Boy being shown on Twitter.

Crazy old women

Jeez, how absolutely loopy is Bettina Arndt, not to mention ungrateful to a government which thought they were on her side of the culture wars and gave her an AM.

The crazy old Cassie, at the blog for ageing Australian wingnuts and Putin admirers, has extracted a part from an email Bettina sent out to her subscribers after the election:

It wasn’t that the Morrison government didn’t listen to women. This pussy-whipped crew sniveled, and groveled, like a cuckolded man clutching desperately at the ankles of his departing wife. Remember the appalling apology to Brittany Higgins? Or Morrison’s forced smile when Grace Tame insulted him with her infantile side-eye. Or the cowardly act of allowing Christian Porter and Alan Tudge to be pushed out of their ministerial roles over unproven sexual assault allegations. Or the cringing over the parliamentary harassment report, denying the very low incidence of actual harassment and high rates of female bullying.

Beautifully put Bettina.

Ha!   Yes, if only the Morrison government had talked tougher to the women appalled at an apparent cover up of an alleged rape at Parliament House.   If only Morrison had refused to have any type of enquiry into a historical rape allegation against the nation's top law officer.   Wait - he did!  

You have to be extraordinarily stupid to think that Morrison (or, of course, Porter, who folded his defamation action) handled it appropriately or well.  

I like the way she uses the sexist term "pussy whipped" too - and when I Google that, I see she used it against the Shorten government - but she still got her AM from Morrison - what an embarrassment.  

Earlier this year, Arndt wrote a bizarre piece at online Quadrant about the inquest about the Hannah Clarke murder case - the one where the husband burned alive his wife and 3 young children - in which she claims to condemn his actions (well, duh) - but then criticises the attitude of the police officer that the murderer's nightly demand for sex was a domestic violence warning sign.   Yes, it's all feminism gone mad, pushing a man beyond his limits.  [Sarc].  Ridiculously, Bettina lists a string of other appalling and extremely controlling behaviour by the father that came out of the inquest, including threats to kill a previous partner - but she still concluded "I will now write an article about how this man was not given enough help."    You know someone has pushed the line when a reader of Quadrant responds in comments:

It’s not often I disagree with anything Ms Arndt writes, but she’s lost me on this one.

But that's Bettina for you.  She's absolutely nuts.  (As is Cassie - whose hyperventilating climate change post I might copy one day too.)