The renewable energy changes and policy

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
I got almost a full garbage bag of hemp tops from the field down the road with permission from the farmer. They are only growing for fibre so don't care if I want the tops so I should be able to get more every fall.

Pretty soon I'll cook 100g of flower down to oil and send a sample to a lab in Vancouver to see how much CBD I can get for free. Generally there's about 6% or more so low yield but if free it's a good deal. I could just call and see what strain they grow too.

This field is a mile deep and half a mile wide. That big white building in the upper left is the new hemp processing plant they are still setting up. The plants were at the top of that scale when they cropped it, let it ret for a few weeks then roll it up in big round bales like alfalfa.

View attachment 5361180

:peace:
I knew some hemp farmers in the peg who had day jobs where I worked, they wanted to break into the CBD market and grow strains higher in CBD. Blowing $100 grand for a super critical CO2 rig in the barn is not a biggy for them, par for the course.
 

CANON_Grow

Well-Known Member

Carbon Capture and Storage. Inconvenient new data.

So, Carbon Capture and Storage then. Climate change cure-all or delusional diversion by our friends over at Fossil Fuel HQ? Well, some people much smarter than me have been investigating, so I thought we should take at look at their findings
It's hard to take some of the information at face value when there is a pretty clear bias behind the push to only promote solar and wind power generation and thinking battery tech is the only saviour. To think there won't be technological advances on how to store CO2 is just not believable, and the cost for CCS could be lower than converting everything. Reading the "report" in the link provided below the video is more than just a cost analysis of the different climate change mitigation strategies:

A “just transition” – securing livelihoods and addressing inequalities while moving towards a low-carbon future – will be “essential to reducing climate risks and addressing sustainable development priorities”, the report states.
It adds that a just transition requires not just rapid change, but also “removing the underlying drivers of vulnerability and high emissions” and taking into consideration the interests of different communities and cultures. Furthermore, the transition must not “perpetuate asymmetries between richer and poorer states and people”, nor “replace old forms of injustice with new ones”.


Statements like ^ make me disregard everything they have said. You cannot involve feels when completing financial analysis comparisons; I have no issue adjusting final costs to incorporate additional monies needed to assist poorer states to be fair, but the cost comparisons mean nothing if they input arbitrary numbers to make everything just.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
It's hard to take some of the information at face value when there is a pretty clear bias behind the push to only promote solar and wind power generation and thinking battery tech is the only saviour. To think there won't be technological advances on how to store CO2 is just not believable, and the cost for CCS could be lower than converting everything. Reading the "report" in the link provided below the video is more than just a cost analysis of the different climate change mitigation strategies:

A “just transition” – securing livelihoods and addressing inequalities while moving towards a low-carbon future – will be “essential to reducing climate risks and addressing sustainable development priorities”, the report states.
It adds that a just transition requires not just rapid change, but also “removing the underlying drivers of vulnerability and high emissions” and taking into consideration the interests of different communities and cultures. Furthermore, the transition must not “perpetuate asymmetries between richer and poorer states and people”, nor “replace old forms of injustice with new ones”.


Statements like ^ make me disregard everything they have said. You cannot involve feels when completing financial analysis comparisons; I have no issue adjusting final costs to incorporate additional monies needed to assist poorer states to be fair, but the cost comparisons mean nothing if they input arbitrary numbers to make everything just.
His opinion, but it is shared by many who think carbon capture sucks for now and might work for future mitigation. Other recent reports paint a different picture about renewables and battery storage. Economics and superior technology will decide in the end, but we might not have long to wait to find out.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
@Sativied I wonder what those "cunt farmers" would think about this, see the report I posted earlier in the thread on their economic doom, apples to many of them too. The RethinkX forecast is 5 years old, and we are 4 years in, dunno if the cost curves are tracking so far, but if they are... The Germans and others will be blocking the roads with their tractors all over Europe too! I still have trouble getting my head around the implications, if it turns out to be true.

Looking into the latest news on precision fermentation, since the implications for the environment economy and politics seem so profound and near term. I'm wondering about those cost curves and breakthroughs on nutrient solutions produced cheaply by PF for instance that could have an industry wide cascade effect on production costs. The industry is also amenable to automation reducing costs, for now a look at some new PF companies popping up. Those that use yeast to produce dairy proteins like whey should be able to leverage brewing technology and equipment to rapidly scale production, even taking over an old beer brewery, or a beer company might leverage its expertise and facilities.

A small random sampling from the recent news... Notice the dates on the articles.








 
Last edited:

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
In 10 to 20 years if the transportation and electricity sectors go renewable or zero emissions, industry and shipping cleans up, and livestock agriculture is disrupted as predicted, we will emit a fraction of the CO2. There will be far less maritime traffic, hardly any oil and less agricultural products moving, less international trade more onshoring and much more automation. We might be well on our way to slashing emissions in a decade and if we can get rid of agricultural emissions like cow farts and burbs along with the cows, we will drop methane emissions as well as CO2. Some estimate we will be able to sink a lot of carbon naturally over a few decades by rewilding former agricultural land. Those industries and countries still emitting carbon in a decade or two will have increasing pressure to clean up their act. When the majority of adults quit smoking, smokers rapidly lost their rights as it went out of fashion.

It is an optimistic outlook backed up by serious forecasts that have been right about EVs, solar and batteries years ago and their detailed forecast on protein production and biotechnology has perhaps the most profound implications for global climate change and perhaps even reversing it.

Your grand kids will live apparently, and the environmental gloom might be lifting, we will soon see, because the time frame for the changes is now and in the next few years to a decade, after that they should be very apparent as the disruptions take hold.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
If the predictions come true about food production in a decade you should be able to buy land or a farm cheap and used ICE tractors and other equipment should be cheap. For those who want to "go back to the land" and live and eat a more traditional way, there should be plenty of opportunity, don't expect to make a living at it unless you are servicing an urban area with specialty foods or produce. Grain and soy farmers should be ok, but there will be other farmers trying to compete when the feed stock market crashes. Additional land will open up to grow grains, produce and pulses too and electric agriculture should cut their costs in a decade as they transition away from fossil fuels and go solar with batteries or grid deals. Land for solar will also drop in price and more of it will open up, wind turbine payments might be what keeps many ranchers alive. These are just a few of the implications of the protein production revolution. They might develop a genetically modified plant that would soak up so much carbon it would turn black! WTF knows what will happen after 2035!
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Looks like the food fight is on, republicans are taking notice and universities are fostering the technology as new centers open up, notice the dates on the article... I haven't looked into to this in any depth and don't know what has been happening in the past few years, however startup activity is frenetic now and capital is pouring into the industry and the articles, papers and trade publications are increasing rapidly in this area.




 

Sativied

Well-Known Member
@Sativied I wonder what those "cunt farmers" would think about this, see the report I posted earlier in the thread on their economic doom, apples to many of them too. The RethinkX forecast is 5 years old, and we are 4 years in, dunno if the cost curves are tracking so far, but if they are... The Germans and others will be blocking the roads with their tractors all over Europe too! I still have trouble getting my head around the implications, if it turns out to be true.

Looking into the latest news on precision fermentation, since the implications for the environment economy and politics seem so profound and near term.
Good stuff.

I see Rutger Bregman (author Utopia for Realists and How Can We Get There, same guy who started about taxes at Davos and caused Tucker Carlson to melt down on his own show) has been writing and posting quite a bit about it (cellulair agriculture include precision fermentation).

Nearly a third of all EU subsidies go to agricultural. Over 99% of that goes to meat and dairy. NL get’s a billion annually, France, Italy, and Germany a whole lot more. It’s partly a historic artifact, negotiating agricultural subsidies allowed countries like NL, Germany and France to slighlty offset their net contribution to the EU. Most goes to the north west of eu, i.e. the members who receive most also pay most. So it’s a tool by itself, one some countries (especially France and Italy) would hate to see go because just a tiny piece of NL will produce enough.

As one of the main dairy exporters in the world, NL used to have China by the balls, well at least a two-finger pinch on one ball. China set out to massively increase and promote milk consumption a few years ago, as well as production. Still not self-sufficient but getting their faster than expected. If not, it’s going to affect the trade balance with China in a negative way too.

Cows got to be impregnated to produce milk. Who knew… well, turns out that comes as a surprise to many. It leads to a calf. NL slaughters 750k of those by product calves per year. From 1.5mil milk cows (not sure how that works but ah well…). And we’ve gotten so efficient at it, others export the same amount to us for us to exterminate them. The only upside of it being done in NL is that we generally do adhere to the regulations and use most of the calf, including for leather of course. Without that leather and byproducts, other countries with less strict rules would produce part of that it in even less animal and environment friendly ways.

1.5mil calves, annually, as a by product of milk produced in this corner of eu. We got a 100million chickens. Almost 6 per capita. Half the country’s land is used for agriculture (producing only 1.5%gdp, but half of that is from plants not animals). So yeah, bring it.

This is from the most powerful dairy company in NL. The main middleman between dutch farmers and stores and other countries.

 

Sativied

Well-Known Member
I just checked to see if and what the political parties had to say about it in recent elections, and it makes me almost feel bad voor the BBB (farmer party) and its supporters (farmers, obviously). Basically on the far-left (party for the animals) they are all over it, green/labor even set targets for 2030, and on the far-right including BBB it’s not mentioned in their programs at all. The founder and leader of the BBB is not the brightest leaf on the tree, just another populist who saw an opportunity and it sure looks like they could use a better person to defend their interests. On the other hand, all the parties that had ambitious plans for the protein transitition lost in recent elections and won’t be part of the coalition. A similar outcome is starting to seem more likely in Germany, which on the short term worries me a lot more than protein and climate change.



One of the protest signs in Germany: “grandpa, what is a farm? And while dutch farmers had “no farmers, no food” signs, I saw a “no farmers, no beer!” sign in Germany. In that case it’s about diesel subsidies so also tractors for ‘plant’ farmers. Reality is, if we can drastically reduce the cow stock, there will be plenty of space and grain left to create beer.

I said it in previous posts, nothing against a hard working honest farmer, but after more news on those German farmers I do have to conclude they too are cunt farmers. Average loss per farmer 10k annually.… see comment about subsidies above, and that’s just from EU. Nationally they get billions too. Now the government wants to cut on the subsidies (tax cuts) for diesel and they act just as entitled, as if farming is a godgiven right. Their attitude is in a way worse than big oil.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Many pin their political hopes in America on shifting demographics and generational change. I can't think of anything over the next decade that will shift demographics and perhaps destroy rural American political power than the changes with the protein production revolution underway in the biotechnology industry now. Progress from the lab to the fab is fast as they leverage 40 years of biotech R&D and all indications are the industry is on track to meet the forecasts of the RethinkX report from 5 years ago, and they appear to be sticking by their predictions 4 years in. This is very near-term stuff and would have major economic, environmental, ethical, demographic and political implications for America over the next 6 to 10 years! It could completely reshape the economic and political landscape of America in a decade to fifteen years. It could accelerate the effects of demographic and generational change and dilute conservative voting power into urban liberal districts.

They predict vast areas of the Midwest will "rewild" as livestock agriculture dies a rapid death once animal cell culture hits its stride and it will grow on the back of fermentation technology using yeast to make dairy, egg and other proteins. People like to eat meat, and many would like it more if no animals were harmed in its production. However, it is not just in North America where the implications should be felt the most, like batteries and other tech these days the R&D effort is global, and progress happens fast. A look at the volume of news articles, papers and new startups is revealing, along with government support in some places. So far, the protein technological disruption looks to be on track and in concordance with the forecast, from a casual glance at least.
 
Last edited:

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Good stuff.

I see Rutger Bregman (author Utopia for Realists and How Can We Get There, same guy who started about taxes at Davos and caused Tucker Carlson to melt down on his own show) has been writing and posting quite a bit about it (cellulair agriculture include precision fermentation).

Nearly a third of all EU subsidies go to agricultural. Over 99% of that goes to meat and dairy. NL get’s a billion annually, France, Italy, and Germany a whole lot more. It’s partly a historic artifact, negotiating agricultural subsidies allowed countries like NL, Germany and France to slighlty offset their net contribution to the EU. Most goes to the north west of eu, i.e. the members who receive most also pay most. So it’s a tool by itself, one some countries (especially France and Italy) would hate to see go because just a tiny piece of NL will produce enough.

As one of the main dairy exporters in the world, NL used to have China by the balls, well at least a two-finger pinch on one ball. China set out to massively increase and promote milk consumption a few years ago, as well as production. Still not self-sufficient but getting their faster than expected. If not, it’s going to affect the trade balance with China in a negative way too.

Cows got to be impregnated to produce milk. Who knew… well, turns out that comes as a surprise to many. It leads to a calf. NL slaughters 750k of those by product calves per year. From 1.5mil milk cows (not sure how that works but ah well…). And we’ve gotten so efficient at it, others export the same amount to us for us to exterminate them. The only upside of it being done in NL is that we generally do adhere to the regulations and use most of the calf, including for leather of course. Without that leather and byproducts, other countries with less strict rules would produce part of that it in even less animal and environment friendly ways.

1.5mil calves, annually, as a by product of milk produced in this corner of eu. We got a 100million chickens. Almost 6 per capita. Half the country’s land is used for agriculture (producing only 1.5%gdp, but half of that is from plants not animals). So yeah, bring it.

This is from the most powerful dairy company in NL. The main middleman between dutch farmers and stores and other countries.

Like I said it is about to be in their faces and up their asses, really soon! The political implications are mindboggling, and the tech looks to be on track with the predictions.
 

Sativied

Well-Known Member
Looks like the food fight is on, republicans are taking notice and universities are fostering the technology as new centers open up, notice the dates on the article... I haven't looked into to this in any depth and don't know what has been happening in the past few years, however startup activity is frenetic now and capital is pouring into the industry and the articles, papers and trade publications are increasing rapidly in this area.




Every grocerystore in NL has a whole section of plant-based ‘meat’ and other greener alternatives. Unlike in the US, the McPlant is a success and permanent item on the menu. Plenty of 3D-printed meat (Israeli company in NL) available in restaurants too.

I have yet to try any of it. I feel like I do enough without becoming a vegetarian. That’s where I draw the line. That’s for younger generations. On the days I don’t eat meat, I don’t need a replacement either, regardless of how close it is to the real thing.
 

Sativied

Well-Known Member

The numbers speak volumes. In the EU, livestock farmers received approximately 1,200 times more public funding and three times more lobbying money compared to their plant-based counterparts. Moreover, plant-based alternatives got just 0.1% of total public money spent on meat. The authors showed that up to 50% of profits made by meat producers came from subsidies. Marco Contiero from Greenpeace describes the ‘Big Meat lobby’ as being ‘’just as toxic as Big Tobacco or Big Oil and climate-change denial.’’.

Considering the shift to the farmer and meat supporting right in EU their will be many more obstacles to overcome than the tech, production capacity, and production cost.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member

The numbers speak volumes. In the EU, livestock farmers received approximately 1,200 times more public funding and three times more lobbying money compared to their plant-based counterparts. Moreover, plant-based alternatives got just 0.1% of total public money spent on meat. The authors showed that up to 50% of profits made by meat producers came from subsidies. Marco Contiero from Greenpeace describes the ‘Big Meat lobby’ as being ‘’just as toxic as Big Tobacco or Big Oil and climate-change denial.’’.

Considering the shift to the farmer and meat supporting right in EU their will be many more obstacles to overcome than the tech, production capacity, and production cost.
This thread is about the policy implications of new technology to address climate change after all, and this looks like a real humdinger of a policy shift to me! :lol: Lots of ammo for the new industry that will obviously replace them in a decade or so, the fossil fuel industry is fucked too. If they need that amount of government propping up to stay in business now, just imagine what the next decade will bring if the forecasts are true. If America just ended support for ethanal fuel it would lower world food prices and of course the fossil fuel industry subsidies will be under heat too.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
You’re such an optimist. Around 2030 this iteration of the simulation will come to an end and a new one will be started. Almost made it this time. GG, almost figured out a way the descendants of ancient aliens can live on this planet in harmony, without destroying it before they destroy themselves.
These rethinkX guys have got me thinking! :lol:

Their predictions on solar, EVs and batteries were spot on, and in some cases exceeded Tony Seba's prediction, they appear to have the power of prophesy! Almost a religious thing that I call the "Gospel of Green". :lol:
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
These rethinkX guys have got me thinking! :lol:

Their predictions on solar, EVs and batteries were spot on, and in some cases exceeded Tony Seba's prediction, they appear to have the power of prophesy! Almost a religious thing that I call the "Gospel of Green". :lol:
How do we know the bolded? I didn’t and won’t watch reading-entrails vids from an unfamiliar small-timer.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
How do we know the bolded? I didn’t and won’t watch reading-entrails vids from an unfamiliar small-timer.
If you look into it, you will find Tony Seba wrote about the current solar, EV and battery trends a decade ago and developed models that predict technological change. Since that time an organization has evolved that turned into a think tank to research technological change, worth a look. You don't need to swallow everything they say, but they are data driven along with other statistical scientists who study climate and technology.
 
Top