Hi Ugo! Conspiracy theorists are still alive in Russia!
Here is a piece from the recent (1/25/24) post of one of the Russian popular theorists of the world transformation (Sergey Pereslegin).
The title of his post is "Reducing the world's population is the main goal of Davos" (it was about recent Davos Forum):
"...The most interesting was the statement by Meadows (founder of the Club of Rome and author of the book “The Limits to Growth”) about the need to reduce the population to 1-2 billion people. But at the same time he made a reservation that this should be done, if possible, in non-violent, peaceful ways. But he does not explain how it is possible to peacefully and non-violently turn 8 billion people into 1 or 2 billion in a relatively short period of time, even 500 years. As a smart person, he understands that it is impossible to do this peacefully."...
I guess the resources declining graph might refer to some sectors - like fossil fuels and forestry and fisheries and healthy soil and even - sadly - biodiversity. But there are ways to turn that around and adjust. We desperately need more conservation efforts.
Then there's Precision Fermentation - etc. Just for a moment imagine bankrupting livestock grazing!? Imagine the world being given vastly more regions to rewild? Biologists going in to try and replant original native trees and ecosystems? 3 TRILLION trees regrowing - and soaking up all historical anthropogenic CO2!
In other areas - as costs have risen - simpler materials are substituted. Now while we need rare-earths and various Critical Minerals for ELECTRONICS - we do NOT for the bulk materials in the Energy Transition! (Footnote below).
When just 0.1% of the land could supply all the power we need to run the modern world - I cannot see how ENERGY is limited? When we have enough energy we can do so many other things to recycle our current waste streams. Indeed - we might have more energy than we know what to do with because many places will Overbuild to get through winter, and come Spring - BOOM! Super-cheap super-abundant power to desalinate all the fresh water you want, etc. We need activists inspired by a Bright Green worldview that we can all enjoy a prosperous modern Eco-city world, while conservation efforts try to bring as much life as we can through the coming bottleneck - and then the Demographic Transition takes over and reduces the number of consumers by the end of the century to about 7 or 6 billion of us. What I call - "Demographic Decoupling." That's it. Just my usual perspective.
---
CRITICAL MINERALS FOOTNOTE (for those who have not read it yet.)
Have you ever played "The Substitution Game?” EG: “Can you make X without Y?” For example - “Can you make solar without tellurium?” Google it. Read. Check all the energy transition technologies for all the minerals you’ve heard are “essential.” EG:-
SOLAR PANELS: 95% of solar panel brands are normal crystalline cells that already avoid ANY rare-earths or Critical Minerals by using silicon - which is 27% of the Earth’s crust, and aluminium 8% and some silver or copper to send the electricity out. But even COPPER can be replaced by aluminium - 8% of the earth’s crust and 1200 TIMES more abundant than copper. (Aluminium is less conductive so you just use more.) What about the Gallium, Tellurium, Cadmium and Indium you’ve heard we NEED? Must be a thin-film brand screaming for their precious resources - because only 5% of solar panels are thin film. Nice - maybe essential for a few niche purposes - but civilisation will survive without them.
This next one has radically reinvented their turbine so that instead of requiring servicing 4 times a year, those parts NEVER need servicing once installed. http://newsreleases.sandia.gov/turbine_innovation/
LITHIUM RESERVES: We have 22 million tons of lithium reserves. At 8kg per EV it’s enough for 2.75 BILLION EV’s, twice what we need.
GRID storage: Sodium batteries for the first 2 hours: then pumped hydro takes over. Sodium is 30% cheaper, operates in a much greater temperature range and is thermally stable (doesn’t suddenly burst into flames). For deep storage use OFF-river pumped hydro. There are over 100 TIMES the off-river pumped hydro sites we need worldwide. https://re100.eng.anu.edu.au/pumped_hydro_atlas/
RECYCLING all these is getting more efficient. Unlike burning fossil fuels, once mined, all these minerals go into the industrial ecosystem to be recycled forever. "Black mass" from ground-up EV batteries is no longer a waste product to dispose of, but a sought after resource.
Data scientist Hannah Ritchie of “Our world in data” and her own research says we have enough minerals - but there might be temporary shortages as we need to open more mines
I do - but I'm trying to get my head around the Club of Rome and "Degrowth" and what it looks like in another's blog. (Also - I did split my comment into main point and Footnotes - because I think you've seen some of the footnotes material before. It was more for other commenters / lurkers.)
I agree with almost all, still you must consider that no industrial system can be fully circular because in best case scenario you still MUST have a little percentage of waste.
The idea of circularity can be 100% effective only if we consider the planet, no means for atoms to get away from gravity well (rocket science excluded), we forever have to "mine" something, but this doesn't mean that we must dig earth: phytomining, seawater harvesting and similar SLOW method for concentrate dispersed resources, a kind of "farming" because is the usual work of living things!
Options are here, but we must cope with the slow peace that huge social systems take to shift: usually we see changes with the death of a generation and the coming to fruition of another.
It depends what we mean. There are some casings that are plastic or whatever that might be burned off and not recycled - but the rest of the battery is. So if it's just hydrocarbons we'll get them out of plants etc. It depends on cost as to how efficient we go with all the final percentages of recycling - sometimes it's just more efficient to get some of it back in from nature via seaweed farms or whatever.
Athanasius, you make a typical mistake, but one that's difficult to eradicate. 100% recycling is perfectly possible in a complex system when an energy flux is available. Plants have been doing that for a few billion years.
Sorry for the misunderstanding, I made a difference between "industrial recycling" and "planetary recycling" but I suppose that is less clear than I thought: the first is the human way that is based on processing relatively "rich" wastes and still have "waste" (the fraction of the resource extracted that is not viable for the next cycle) but I clearly pointed that nature work on a different principle because assume an input material that have a very low concentration of resources.
Correctly Eclipse that we also can "recycle" some waste burning it , the recycled element is energy and the result is a quite diffuse dispersion f the constituting elements, still also this can be got back: burning waste wood got us energy and CO2, we can get back the atoms of the gas from a new plant that get the low concentration of CO2 and convert it back to wood!
I consider our next step in mining more akin "farming" because it must be based on systems similar to the exposed "recycling" process of carbon and oxygen from burned wood, a probably low energy method for concentrating desired resources from a matrix that is slow but hi efficient (like plants). We are beginning to get it for Uranium mining from seawater, nature do it making NiFe nodules at the bottom of the ocean and more possibilities are lying around.
BTW I suppose that every gravity well is almost a perfectly closed system for material resources because it is too energetically costly to get out matter, the problem is only how concentrated (low entropy) or dispersed (hi entropy) various elements are and how to concentrate efficiently.
Hi Ugo! Conspiracy theorists are still alive in Russia!
Here is a piece from the recent (1/25/24) post of one of the Russian popular theorists of the world transformation (Sergey Pereslegin).
The title of his post is "Reducing the world's population is the main goal of Davos" (it was about recent Davos Forum):
"...The most interesting was the statement by Meadows (founder of the Club of Rome and author of the book “The Limits to Growth”) about the need to reduce the population to 1-2 billion people. But at the same time he made a reservation that this should be done, if possible, in non-violent, peaceful ways. But he does not explain how it is possible to peacefully and non-violently turn 8 billion people into 1 or 2 billion in a relatively short period of time, even 500 years. As a smart person, he understands that it is impossible to do this peacefully."...
It is in perfect agreement with the statement by Cardinal Richelieu!
And, unfortunately, it happens not just in Russia
I guess the resources declining graph might refer to some sectors - like fossil fuels and forestry and fisheries and healthy soil and even - sadly - biodiversity. But there are ways to turn that around and adjust. We desperately need more conservation efforts.
And we need new food techniques - like the 3d seaweed and shellfish farms that could feed a world of 12 billion all the protein they want while RESTORING ocean health. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/01/sea-forest-better-name-seaweed-un-food-adviser The seaweed powder can be a food supplement that goes in everything from dairy to bread. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666833522000302
Then there's Precision Fermentation - etc. Just for a moment imagine bankrupting livestock grazing!? Imagine the world being given vastly more regions to rewild? Biologists going in to try and replant original native trees and ecosystems? 3 TRILLION trees regrowing - and soaking up all historical anthropogenic CO2!
In other areas - as costs have risen - simpler materials are substituted. Now while we need rare-earths and various Critical Minerals for ELECTRONICS - we do NOT for the bulk materials in the Energy Transition! (Footnote below).
When just 0.1% of the land could supply all the power we need to run the modern world - I cannot see how ENERGY is limited? When we have enough energy we can do so many other things to recycle our current waste streams. Indeed - we might have more energy than we know what to do with because many places will Overbuild to get through winter, and come Spring - BOOM! Super-cheap super-abundant power to desalinate all the fresh water you want, etc. We need activists inspired by a Bright Green worldview that we can all enjoy a prosperous modern Eco-city world, while conservation efforts try to bring as much life as we can through the coming bottleneck - and then the Demographic Transition takes over and reduces the number of consumers by the end of the century to about 7 or 6 billion of us. What I call - "Demographic Decoupling." That's it. Just my usual perspective.
---
CRITICAL MINERALS FOOTNOTE (for those who have not read it yet.)
Have you ever played "The Substitution Game?” EG: “Can you make X without Y?” For example - “Can you make solar without tellurium?” Google it. Read. Check all the energy transition technologies for all the minerals you’ve heard are “essential.” EG:-
SOLAR PANELS: 95% of solar panel brands are normal crystalline cells that already avoid ANY rare-earths or Critical Minerals by using silicon - which is 27% of the Earth’s crust, and aluminium 8% and some silver or copper to send the electricity out. But even COPPER can be replaced by aluminium - 8% of the earth’s crust and 1200 TIMES more abundant than copper. (Aluminium is less conductive so you just use more.) What about the Gallium, Tellurium, Cadmium and Indium you’ve heard we NEED? Must be a thin-film brand screaming for their precious resources - because only 5% of solar panels are thin film. Nice - maybe essential for a few niche purposes - but civilisation will survive without them.
WIND TURBINES - are made from iron - 5% of the earth’s crust, aluminium, and fibreglass blades - that’s polyester resin and glass fibres. They’re recyclable now. Wind generators WITHOUT rare-earth magnets are now a thing:- http://www.offshorewind.biz/2022/07/28/15-mw-rare-earth-free-offshore-wind-turbine-seeks-path-to-market/
Niron Magnetics: https://www.nironmagnetics.com/
This next one has radically reinvented their turbine so that instead of requiring servicing 4 times a year, those parts NEVER need servicing once installed. http://newsreleases.sandia.gov/turbine_innovation/
LITHIUM RESERVES: We have 22 million tons of lithium reserves. At 8kg per EV it’s enough for 2.75 BILLION EV’s, twice what we need.
GRID storage: Sodium batteries for the first 2 hours: then pumped hydro takes over. Sodium is 30% cheaper, operates in a much greater temperature range and is thermally stable (doesn’t suddenly burst into flames). For deep storage use OFF-river pumped hydro. There are over 100 TIMES the off-river pumped hydro sites we need worldwide. https://re100.eng.anu.edu.au/pumped_hydro_atlas/
ELECTRIC MOTORS: Valeo have a rare-earth free electric motor. https://www.valeo.com/en/catalogue/pts/high-voltage-rare-earth-free-electric-motor/
TESLA are working on one - prototype due mid 2024? https://www.carwow.co.uk/tesla/news/5220/new-tesla-ev-compact-electric-car-hatchback-price-specs-release-date
It’s a trend across the industry with Tesla, BMW, General Motors, Borgwarner, Jaguar & Land Rover, Tata, ZF, Vitesco, Renault, Nissan, Mercedes-Benz, Toyota, Bentley, Marelli and Eurogroup Laminations all working on it. https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/automakers-suppliers-pushing-cut-rare-earths-evs-2023-11-14/
RECYCLING all these is getting more efficient. Unlike burning fossil fuels, once mined, all these minerals go into the industrial ecosystem to be recycled forever. "Black mass" from ground-up EV batteries is no longer a waste product to dispose of, but a sought after resource.
COPPER: Replace with aluminium. Aluminium is less conductive so you have to have 25% thicker wires - but that doesn’t matter as it is half the price and weight. It can replace 90% of the functions of copper. https://www.shapesbyhydro.com/en/material-properties/how-we-can-substitute-aluminium-for-copper-in-the-green-transition/
OTHER REFERENCES:-
Wang et al Jan 2023 says we have enough minerals
https://www.cell.com/joule/fulltext/S2542-4351(23)00001-6#%20
The IEA says we have enough but must encourage speed of mine approval
https://www.iea.org/topics/critical-minerals
Data scientist Hannah Ritchie of “Our world in data” and her own research says we have enough minerals - but there might be temporary shortages as we need to open more mines
https://www.sustainabilitybynumbers.com/p/minerals-for-electricity
Overall, "yep" -- some "maybe not"
Well - at least you're polite about it and not censoring me like some. ;-)
You are a bit overlong, but you ground your statements on data. Which is good. Don't you have a blog of your own?
I do - but I'm trying to get my head around the Club of Rome and "Degrowth" and what it looks like in another's blog. (Also - I did split my comment into main point and Footnotes - because I think you've seen some of the footnotes material before. It was more for other commenters / lurkers.)
I agree with almost all, still you must consider that no industrial system can be fully circular because in best case scenario you still MUST have a little percentage of waste.
The idea of circularity can be 100% effective only if we consider the planet, no means for atoms to get away from gravity well (rocket science excluded), we forever have to "mine" something, but this doesn't mean that we must dig earth: phytomining, seawater harvesting and similar SLOW method for concentrate dispersed resources, a kind of "farming" because is the usual work of living things!
Options are here, but we must cope with the slow peace that huge social systems take to shift: usually we see changes with the death of a generation and the coming to fruition of another.
“All truth passes through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed.
Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”
— Arthur Schopenhauer
It depends what we mean. There are some casings that are plastic or whatever that might be burned off and not recycled - but the rest of the battery is. So if it's just hydrocarbons we'll get them out of plants etc. It depends on cost as to how efficient we go with all the final percentages of recycling - sometimes it's just more efficient to get some of it back in from nature via seaweed farms or whatever.
Athanasius, you make a typical mistake, but one that's difficult to eradicate. 100% recycling is perfectly possible in a complex system when an energy flux is available. Plants have been doing that for a few billion years.
Sorry for the misunderstanding, I made a difference between "industrial recycling" and "planetary recycling" but I suppose that is less clear than I thought: the first is the human way that is based on processing relatively "rich" wastes and still have "waste" (the fraction of the resource extracted that is not viable for the next cycle) but I clearly pointed that nature work on a different principle because assume an input material that have a very low concentration of resources.
Correctly Eclipse that we also can "recycle" some waste burning it , the recycled element is energy and the result is a quite diffuse dispersion f the constituting elements, still also this can be got back: burning waste wood got us energy and CO2, we can get back the atoms of the gas from a new plant that get the low concentration of CO2 and convert it back to wood!
I consider our next step in mining more akin "farming" because it must be based on systems similar to the exposed "recycling" process of carbon and oxygen from burned wood, a probably low energy method for concentrating desired resources from a matrix that is slow but hi efficient (like plants). We are beginning to get it for Uranium mining from seawater, nature do it making NiFe nodules at the bottom of the ocean and more possibilities are lying around.
BTW I suppose that every gravity well is almost a perfectly closed system for material resources because it is too energetically costly to get out matter, the problem is only how concentrated (low entropy) or dispersed (hi entropy) various elements are and how to concentrate efficiently.