Monthly Archives: January 2021



 

On Being a Dick

This title does refer to the writer of this. I am a dick about some things. It is a weakness, because it doesn’t help with communicating ideas. If you try to communicate an idea you generally have a hard time, because you have the idea, but everyone else is thinking about totally different things. So generally your idea needs to be an answer to a question that is being asked. If not then it is either ignored, not heard or misunderstood.

Well, Steve Jobs was a dick..

What then if you think your idea is relevant to increase awareness of the situation so good decisions are made, meaning ones that do not lead to damage (for instance to our climate). Then you may be writing pieces like I do about climate change. There is a 100% guarantee you are distracting people from ideas they have themselves, from visions of the future they have and from their feeling of comfort that everyone can develop in almost any situation if we’re not being actively tortured.

To disturb such tranquility with messages about climate change or global warming you have to hate people, or at least think their little coccoons of comfort are not important, you need to be a dick. You will be considered a dick (or a c&nt if you are female). The truth is you where talking to the wrong crowd, you are using the wrong language and saying the wrong things. This is shown simply by the fact you get a negative response. If you get a negative response, stop! If you don’t hear a question you might as well shut up.

I am a dick in many situations, which is because I have not been spared in the past and because I base my opinions on what I know to be evident and with consideration. I don’t borrow them from others or repeat them. I am not sure if that is because I simply can not remember the opinion of others or that I don’t care about other people or that I too easily come up with my own reasons. It is not the way most people choose what they say, but then again most people don’t look to speak truthfully, most people don’t think about what they say at all. They just want to stay out of ‘harms way’ socially.

A true dick also raises his voice, which happens when the facts in his/her perception are vandalized, stated incorrectly. A great way to anger a dick is by doubting something he/she works very hard on prove true. So if you are calling a dilligent person sloppy or cast aspersions on someone trying hard to help. A dick has no problems doing that him/herself though. It seems the comfort not felt by the dick becomes the standard. That is why it is necessary to feel good and have an organized life if you want to communicate ideas as a non-dick. The risk of that is that you sink into a coccoon of comfort where you no longer care about the truth. The truth is served by discomfortable people.

I would like not to be a dick, and most of the time I am not. However I will not avoid stating facts especially when they are challenged by mythical ideas or lies, fake news, false priests of economics or the fossil industry, or simply commercial interest. It is just a matter of social conscience that those lying or being incorrect matter just as much as those they may harm with their ideas, and as a consequence you might as well expose them to the other reality that they do not believe, ignore or deny its existence of.

How not to be a dick? For a dick that’s not that easy, but judging by the first paragraph the secret lies in evoking questions, not giving answers. This would be my guess. Then if people ask “Do we have enough oil?” at least there is an opportunity to say “no” (if that’s the case) or “yes, but”. “Can we keep on cutting down trees like this?” is a great question. How do you get people to ask it? Maybe the role of a dick comes into its strenght most if he/she states something that evokes the question the answer to which he/she wants people to know. So “We can cut down all trees in the woooooorld!!”. That is a (virtual) event, not a fact, not an accusation.

Maybe I as somewhat of a dick sometimes try to do this more I achieve more. I will.



 

Virgin Hyperloop Vision

Virgin is taking the hyperloop idea seriously. The idea being that you travel at great speed through a tube with rarified or no air (vacuum). This of course is a strange notion, you would be in a sealed capsule going at 800 km/hr through a tube where you could not breath. If it gets stuck how would you escape? But this goes for trains and planes and busses as well, if your plane breaks down in mid air or you train derails or your bus runs off a bridge.

We’ve written about glass tubes for hyperloop here. If hyperloop tubes where made of laminated glass you could make them super strong yet transparent and super smooth. Virgin is however going with a propulsion system that requires systems mounted in the tube, but maybe even those can be integrated and added during the “tube rolling” process.

Modern rail is advancing towards faster trains, but these require enormous amounts of energy to push themselves through the ever denser air in front. Planes go to altitudes where air is less thick but rail connections are usually at ground level, where air is denser (the densest air you find near the Dead Sea for example as this lake lies 400 meters below sea level). Pushing through no air is way easier.

We hope funds are diverted to Hyperloop projects, and that these project don’t get stuck (by fossil lobbies) in endless research from universities (as is the case with thin film solar for example). We need them now. In the vision of Virgin Hyperloop the tubes are covered with solar panels. They make the propulsion free of cost. We could apply such ideas elsewhere, also in logistics. Why not have a silk road that self propells? Food for thought!



 

Herstel de Verzorgingsstaat Roboeconomisch

Rutte is opgehoepeld. Helaas zijn VVD stemmers niet al te snugger dus de kans dat hij weer premier wordt is groot. Zoniet dan komt er misschien een club aan de macht die wel hart heeft voor nederlanders, niet alleen voor bedrijven. Maar hoe ga je in een wereld die zich aan moet passen aan de klimaatveranderingen en de schadelijke gevolgen van gebruik van fossiel meer welvaart creeren voor mensen met weinig eigen middelen of capaciteiten? Heel eenvoudig : Roboeconomisch. Waar de huidige economie continu vereist dat we opnieuw energie kopen kan hernieuwbare energie een keer gekocht worden en vervolgens decennia lang het creeren van weelde faciliteren. Dit is het geheim van de Roboeconomie hij is ‘cashflow lean’

Als gedachten experiment bedachten we de Markermeerzonnecentrale.nl Dat is een grote drijvende zonnecentrale op het Markermeer. Die kan als het de helft van het meer bedekt alle centrales van Nederland vervangen. Dat betekent dat alles wat we in Nederland produceren dan met stroom uit die drijvende centrale geproduceerd kan worden, alle fabrieken, bakkerijen, distributiecentra, kunstmestfabrieken, recycle centra, scholen, theaters : alles. dat betekent dat de werkelijke kosten van die weelde liggen in het onderhouden van de zonnecentrale. Dat zijn dus marginale ondehouds en vervangingskosten. Hebben we aan de oever een grote (dunne film) panelen fabriek gebouwd dan zijn die kosten natuurlijk minimaal, en het is zeker denkbaar dat die nul zijn aangezien je de werknemers met energie krediet (Euro’s) kunt betalen.

Het is al vele jaren bekend dat hernieuwbare energie weelde kan creeren, huizen kan verwarmen en alle andere dingen kan doen die we nu met fossiel doen. Het argument tegen was altijd dat fossiel goedkoper was. Dat is natuurlijk een grote leugen gebleken. De kosten van het gebruik van fossiel zijn immens, het kost nu al vele mensenlevens, al zijn het levens die ons (kennelijk) niet veel kunnen schelen (zoals in Africa of Azie of Zuid Amerika). Het probleem is dat mensen aan de verkoop van fossiel ‘verdienden’, er rijk van werden. Aangezien fossiel het middel was om weelde te creered waren de eigenaren van fossiel (en hun intermediaries de banken) in staat mensen te verleiden met die weelde om te zorgen dat we doorgingen met het gebruik van hun ‘product’. Dat product omvat fossiel -en- krediet (maar dat voert wat ver).

Willen we met een nieuw niet asociaal kabinet toekomst bestendig worden en de schade van Wiebes inhalen dan zouden we een medogenloos hernieuwbare energie beleid moeten voeren. Medogenloos omdat fossiel medogenloos is geweest ten opzicht van de werel, omdat fossiel de drijfveer was achter het asociale beleid van Rutte en de VVD. Het ging hen om meer geld meer fossiele cashflow. Wat we nodig hebben is meer weelde in handen van burgers. Reele waarde dus geen blokjeshuis van 400.000 Euro maar een motiverende woning met een tuin voor 150.000 Euro. Dat kan allemaal als we daar onze eigen energie voor opwekken, zodat niemand ons kan tegenhouden als we willen graven, bouwen, vervoeren, assambleren, opruimen, aanplanten etc. Geen banken, geen externe investeerdes.

De speerpunt moet het opwekken van hernieuwbare energie zijn, want efficientie bevrijdt ons niet snel genoeg uit de macht van fossiel. Opwekken opwekken opwekken, en de industrie omvormen naar een electrische. Waterstof is nog een uitstel en pro fossiele strategie. Biomassa was een strategie om veel cashflow te genereren. Zelf zonnepanelen en windmolens bouwen, op een zo groot mogelijke schaal en zo snel mogelijk. Gebruik maken van de meest recente technologie, manieren van automatiseren, AI, robotica. Hierbij kan bv. ook land in het buitenland worden aangekocht zodat Nederlandse bedrijven daar innovatief aan de slag kunnen bv met de integratie van zonnepanelen en landbouw. Denk je dat een landbouwerktuig niet tussen zonnepanelen kan oogsten?

De Roboeconomie, die met gebruik van hernieuwbare energie en technologie de ecologie herstelt en welvaart creert is waar we uiteindelijk zullen uitkomen. Laten we niet eerst elke andere domme en asociale optie proberen.



 

What is the Roboeconomy?

Experts are advising to forgo the goal of economic growth to save humanity from the ravages of fossil fuel use. You’ve heard it all before, but have you ever connected the dots? Ravages of fossil fuel use? Why would we tolerate that? Because someone sells it to us. Why do we need to buy it, its found in deep under ground, nobody made it or owns it really. Why don’t we simply distribute it? The answer is we ‘simply’ do and the mechanism by which we do it is called the ‘Economy’. The economy is a system to ‘optimally’ allocate fossil resources.

You can ask “Optimally for whom?”. Good question. Not for you if you means the average non-oil well owner or banker. You may be ignoring those having a hard life in your country, which is a higher percentage than you if you live an easy life (more so in the more economically advanced countries!). The economy is optimizing for one group only : The banks. Because the banks created it and the banks need to remain all powerfull in it to sustain it. There’s only one catch : It only works with fossil fuels. This is why we need to let go of economic goals to save ourselves from the ravages of fossil fuel use.

So is there an alternative. The answer is YES. Its called the Roboeconomy. Many because it uses Robots because it is Ecologically compatible with the existence of life on Earth and because it does strife to maintain an economy, which is simply a structure who’s goal is to use resources optimally but this time to the benefit of mankind.

The main elements of a ‘roboeconomic’ society is that all energy is from renewable sources. This has the effect of distributing productive capacity more widely and reducing the need to produce or source products from places along an important fossil fuel supply chain or in a way so that transactions make banks rich. Do you think we produce in China because it’s cheaper? Nope. Production in China is not cheaper but the coal there is dumped, and the bunker fuel for the container ships is subsidized and banks get damn rich from all the financial traffic.

There is a lot of ‘economic activity’ related to all the steps needed to make something in China for consumption on the US market. What that means is that the benefits of fossil fuels are distributed all along that production and logistic chain and because banks fight so hard against any alternative to fossil fuels, we need to participate in this process in order to live a decent life.

In the Roboeconomy this global network, the reason for a global bankingsystem, will shrink and all but disappear. Instead production will move closer to consumers and closer to renewable energy sources. This will also happen because there is no reason to market widely anymore. If you have a subsidized dirt cheap global logistic system global brands make sense. If you decide to abandon that you have no reason. There is no profit in selling shoes from Africa in Norway, local shoes will be cheaper!

The first key property of the Roboeconomy, to only use renewable energy will on its own bring all the changes we need, by depowering the banking system. Of course the banks will try to own -All- renewable energy sources. They will also try to slow down the growth of RE in now poor sunny countries as well as the shift to electic production systems and logistics. This is also done by making you a follower. This is a fundamental marketing oriented manipulation to the benefit of the economy. If you still like Coca Cola you need to reflect on that, its a sign you are indoctrinated. Instead of worshipping brands your role is to help with the transition.

The second key property is that technology is used to create wealth and to restore the ecology. The latter will be easy once cheap versatile robots drop in prices. We have the Ford and Boston Dynamic robots and Tesla Roadbots so soon we will have autonomous access to every part of the globe. Innovation in motors stalled for nearly 60 years because it was about selling fossil fuels. Now innovation can free itself, mostly with private money, to truely improve the fate of humans. Robots, AI, new types of logistics. Thin film solar panels (a blocked technology that needs to be freed by an Elon type entrepeneur). As it gets hotter on Earth we will find our means to produce an answer will become less and less encumbered by fossil and banking opposition.

The Roboeconmoy is what this blog is about, and renewable technology and other ideas and concepts. I hope you share our ideas. If so let us know on Twitter at @climatebabes