Through absolutely everything -- wars, energy crises, different political winds, the green movement etc -- primary energy usage goes up and to the right in a smooth-as curve: https://authory.com/JoakimBook/a/a225e561522a44e5897dd89d9953f1b3c
Among the most ironclad, stone-cold, lead-pipe-lock bets of history is that aggregate primary energy consumption is a curve that goes up and to the right. Longtime readers will be familiar with the physical foundations for why this is so: The human endeavor is a constant, unrelenting struggle against the forces of entropy; one must harness primary energy to temporarily prevail in that struggle; one’s standard of living is thus measured by how much primary energy is on offer for the task; and all humans everywhere want a higher standard of living."
"Despite such sound theoretical substance and a mountain of confirmatory empirical evidence, legions of otherwise lucid energy-market participants serially bet against this trend."
Good-natured fun-poking aside, energy pessimism is a useful signal in one important regard: One can predict, with uncanny accuracy, that:
"whatever the attention of the we-are-about-to-run-out crowd is focused on will be the genesis of an imminent innovation breakthrough."
Incredible
"Nothing stops this fiscal train" has an energy equivalent: nothing stops this trend (#1562753).
Doomberg is awful, lol I will never forget at $16K when he called for bitcoin to go to $0... People like this, I try to avoid there takes as well on other subjects.
Nah, differentiate. Listen to good people in the domains in which they are good; ignore them on other topics
Also, that graph gonna look like bitcoin soon...
Where? I find them either retarded or blind enough. Almost everyone these days understands the need for energy, if not entropy. And I don't think we have an imminent Innovation breakthrough in long term future.
Not everyone carries The Feynman Lectures on Physics with them on vacay.
If today a country decides to invest in say Electronic Vehicles with the surge in this EV thing to lessen CO2 emissions and energy trends and the subsequent huge enthalpy of reactions, they need to have a few things in mind to complete the programme and they include:
And while most people who talk about energy crisis and levelheaded opinions would end their list here, those who do not believe in this "godly innovation that can change the future" will list down further:
and other things I might be missing...
Combine these costs and it exceeds the programme budget. The difference between declaring "theory" as "confirmatory empirical evidence " lies in recognising reality as it undermines realistic budget practices and associated environmental concerns.
This is a singular example, feel free to pull in further "empirical evidence", it would eventually boil down to money. That's why I support bitcoin. 😝