It's Not Impossible, We Just Need a Better Plan...

Dr. Simon Michaux, Associate Professor at Geometallurgy at Geological Survey of Finland, discusses the minimum requirements for a net zero future, as well as the restraints on our renewables going forward.
Read academic works by Dr. Michaux: www.researchga...
Support Decouple on Patreon: / decouple
Learn more about Decouple Media: www.decoupleme...

[@michaelkeefer372]

Fascinating interview. Simon Michaux is brilliantly lucid. I look forward to hearing him again on Decouple.

[@eclipsenow5431]

Simon Michaux referred to 2014 European studies developed in 2013 back when renewables were about 10 TIMES more expensive than they are today! The concept of 'Overbuild' had not entered the renewable discussion. But now wind and solar are so cheap, that if winter halves them, you DOUBLE your wind and solar! It's cheaper than trying to store power for 4 weeks. Second, Michaux rejected the cheapest large-scale energy storage which is pumped-hydro electricity storage on the basis that there were not enough sites. His study? He cherry-picked a feasibility study about pumped hydro in the tiny flat island of SINGAPORE! The highest hill is only 15m! I call this lie “Painting the world Singapore.” When I saw him admit this it nearly made me shoot coffee out my nose. From the horse's mouth: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gnPaY4KMjMmKf7M Fortunately the reality is we don't even WANT to build on-river. Off-river is cheaper because you avoid spillways for 1 in 100 year on-river floods. The world has over 100 TIMES the potential sites it needs when you look OFF-RIVER closed loop systems. eclipsenow.wordpress.com/phes/ BUT - batteries for 4 weeks storage ARE possible if you build them from sodium! Yes, sea-salt can now be made into a battery. There is 34 kg per cubic meter of seawater, or 50 quadrillion tonnes, which is enough for 10 billion people to EACH have 5 MILLION tonnes of sodium batteries each - and that’s just from the seawater. It's just a dumb lie that we MUST use batteries that have rare earths! We don't. All these technologies CAN sometimes use rare earth’s for certain advantages - but they do not HAVE to. They'll dump the fancier stuff if the prices rise. It's already happening. Google it. EG: 95% of all solar panels are silicon which is 27% of the earth’s crust. The 5% solar panels that do use rare earth’s are thin-film or for enhanced for space. See this graph. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystalline_silicon Solar also uses a little aluminium for the frame. Aluminium is over 8% of the earth's crust. Wind turbines are made from iron, aluminium, and fibreglass. Iron is used in the steel and can be magnetised for the generator. It is 5% of the earth's crust. How much is that? Digging down a km it’s 200 BILLION tons per person for the 10 billion people we expect by 2050! The wind blades are made from fibreglass which are made from entirely renewable polyester resin and glass fibres. Wind generators without rare-earth magnets are now a thing:- www.offshorewind.biz/2022/07/28/15-mw-rare-earth-free-offshore-wind-turbine-seeks-path-to-market/ www.greenbiz.com/article/myth-and-reality-alternatives-rare-minerals-ev-batteries www.nironmagnetics.com/ This next one sounds AMAZING and could be the future of wind power because it ELIMINATES servicing 4 times a year to basically ZERO over 30 years! Meet the Twistac rotary electrical contact. newsreleases.sandia.gov/turbine_innovation/ EV’s require lighter, more energy dense and expensive Lithium. The USGS says that in 2022 we know about 89 million tons which is 89 BILLION KG's. Tesla's LFP batteries only use 6 kg lithium per battery, which is enough for 14.8 BILLION Cars - and we only need 1.4 billion. (As a New Urbanist I don’t even like cars - but I’m just being honest about how much lithium there is.) They also use iron and phosphorus, both of which can be recycled. There are many new battery chemistries on the way - such as a cheaper lithium sodium mix, super-batteries like lithium-sulphur, but even aluminium-graphene and aluminium-sulphur! "Big Battery" is replacing "Big Oil". There is so much R&D at the moment I'm not even sure we'll be USING lithium at all in 10 to 15 years! Basically - Michaux has cherrypicked the most irrational strawman arguments to maintain his peak oil Doomer message.

[@jasonneugebauer5310]

Awesome interview! This discussion is priceless. I love it when policy and requirements are measured and entered into a spreadsheet to measure feasibility requirements and calculated/measured outcomes. 😅 we are living in crazy town when it comes to policy.

[@ninefox344]

Glad to see Dr. Michaux back on. It seems like the primary disagreement stems from the amount of storage we think we would need for a renewable heavy system. I simply can't imagine how a nationwide energy system could get by on 8 hours of storage. You can find papers that argue for weeks, and some that argue for hours.

[@eclipsenow5431]

Sorry to bust your bubble - but Simon Michaux lied to you. ABUNDANT MATERIALS: While many brands of renewables and batteries CAN use rare earth’s for certain niche markets, they do not HAVE to - and most are already weaning off them because of price and supply issues (especially with China being problematic.) EG: 95% of Solar brands ALREADY mainly use silicon - which is 27% of the Earth’s crust. Wind is made from iron (5%), aluminium (8%) and fibreglass (renewable glass fibres and renewable polyester resins). Half of Tesla’s batteries are LFP (Lithium Iron Phosphate). The USGS reserves from 2022 show we have TEN TIMES the lithium we need for a world of 1.4 billion LPF EV's. But battery tech is changing so fast I’m not sure we’ll even be using lithium in 10 years - as they’re working on aluminium-sulphur and aluminium-graphene mixes. Michaux's European studies about 4 weeks storage are now a decade out of date. Renewables then were TEN TIMES more expensive. These days you OVERBUILD. If winter halves your output, you just build DOUBLE the renewables! Duh! Most places can get their storage down to 2 days. This is EASY to do with Sodium - which is 30% cheaper than lithium AND is less toxic and fire prone. It's GREAT for grid storage. (But BYD are building their "Seagull" car with a sodium battery, which will be super-cheap, but only middle-range.) There’s over 5 MILLION TONS of sea-salt for every person on earth. Forget 4 weeks storage - you could probably store 4 DECADES with that kind of resource! (Not that I’ve done the math - just emphasising it's a LOT!) But want an example of how STUPID Michaux thinks we all are? He just assumes we will not check this stuff. Remember Michaux rejected the cheapest grid storage, which is pumped-hydro? He claims there are difficulties finding enough sites. Really? What study is that based on? From the horse's mouth: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gnPaY4KMjMmKf7M A good pumped hydro site is 500 to 600 meters high - but he cherry-picked a pumped-hydro study about Singapore where the highest hill is only 15 metres! Gee - I wonder why they had “siting issues!” (Facepalm!) He then applies Singapore’s study to the WHOLE WORLD. It’s such a breathtaking lie I call it “Painting the world Singapore.” I don't know if he's dumb or devious - but ignore him at all costs.

[@manoftheroad55]

It's population numbers of G7 nation ..model is to reduce ..see Dr John Campbell excess Mort +20% 2022...

[@Withnail1969]

Months of storage are needed.

[@manoftheroad55]

Smart electric meters/system would turn off supplies to households on a rolling basis... An electric sharing/connection system is being upgraded across all of Europe.. Standby generation would kick in .. power would be turned off for a few hours selectively over all Europe ... Food suppliers/chain would have priority.. Not perfect but gets through problem .. I went through exactly this in a period of 1970 In UK .. Lower electric and energy consumption .. Huge unnecessary electric waste by frivolous use has to end.. Smart electric meters also can ration electric .. It's just beginning

[@tonywilson4713]

No its not simply the size of the storage its also the *TYPE* and the *MATERIALS NEEDED.* By TYPE I mean not just lithium or sodium or some other technology I also mean *SHELF LIFE as in how long can this system store and hold energy for.* For example the Sadoway battery which is liquid and has a very high efficiency *BUT* it also needs to be fully discharged and fully charged each cycle or it degrades quicker (and all batteries degrade over time). It works best when being cycled 1 or 2 times a day. That makes it brilliant for the morning and afternoon surges that modern cities and towns experience. BUT ITS ALSO hopeless for a country like Germany which wants to store up solar energy in the summer and then use it months later in winter. On the materials Simon is 100% going in the right direction although I think some of his work is simplistic. What he does well is make people aware of the issue which NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED. I do have a problem with his solutions in that they are too focused on efficiency rather than practicality.

[@jessieadore]

This is wild. I literally just finished relistening to Dr. Michaux in another interview and was like “hmm, I wonder what he’s thinking today” then this popped up 😂

[@eclipsenow5431]

Michaux is a fraud. Do not take anything he writes or says seriously.

[@thomasd2444]

42:42 - In 2019 , the world mined 95,170 tonnes of Lithium 43:16 - We need 976 , 274 , 657 tonnes for 1st generation [zero C02 - Zero oil energy] 43:32 - To mine 976 MILLION tonnes at the 2019 mining rate requires 10,000 years

[@aliendroneservices6621]

If each car required 8 kg of lithium, 8 million tonnes of lithium would be required to produce a billion pure-plug-in cars. This would be about 100x the 2019 lithium production. Therefore, the IEA's estimate of *_30x_* lithium demand by 2040 seems plausible.

[@Aaron-l9e2z]

​@aliendroneservices6621 you have forgotten that this amount your saying needs to be found first. New deposits of all minerals are on the decline.

[@jasonneugebauer5310]

Priceless calculations.

[@shanewilson2484]

@45:55 I've used concentrated hydrofluoric acid over the last 20 years and I've had a small amount on my skin. I washed it off, put on some calcium gluconate gel, took some tablets with easily absorbed calcium and also some tablets containing magnesium. I reported it to my boss and went to hospital for a brief check. I had no obvious effects. Every year we had a few such incidents and every time there was no significant health issue. You can have a look online and see where people had a whole arm burned with hydrofluoric acid and survived. They were given calcium and magnesium infusions and recovered. Occasionally people die because they don't get proper treatment for a large exposure. In a very large processing plant in a developed country, proper treatment should always be available.

[@manoftheroad55]

As long as U were never vaxef you will be OK

[@jasonneugebauer5310]

It is true that many people work with dangerous chemicals and machines every day and survive. I have worked with a chainsaw for hundreds of hours, which probably has a similar level of danger, and we do it all the time around the world because we see the value of harvesting wood. We will have to do a lot of difficult, dangerous jobs all around the world if we are going to successfully transition to the next level of civilization. We need to be careful with pollution, resource use, and maintaining diversity (in the traditional sense, not the new "diversity") of life, culture, biome, energy use, technology, and completely available true information.

[@shanewilson2484]

@54:20 In a former life I worked at one of the largest open cut mines in the world. The giant dump trucks are constantly going down into the pit and back up and dumping their load. Battery swapping could easily done quickly with the appropriate hardware.

[@davidbrown7313]

'could' is not to say the mine would remain profitable after this change. only the rich 'first world countries' whose wealth does not depend on mining would legislate to extinguish their mining industry like this. mining in africa and south america and Australia will continue using the cost effective diesel engines.

[@grahamt5924]

What about trucks using a pantograph for 98% of the journey and battery for the last 2%

[@swamivardana9911]

After the battery is loaded what is the loading capacity now. BTW under load and the steep incline batteries drain rapidly.

[@swamivardana9911]

Then you can use a train of mules to carry the load.

[@shanewilson2484]

@@swamivardana9911 Google trolley assist haul trucks. Because the vast majority of a mine haul truck's duty cycle is identical you can use the trolley assist system.

[@igorzvo]

Outstanding job by Dr. Simon Michaux and his interviewer. Small note - models have to take into consideration that for this future society multiple adaptation will be needed, both technological and social, and many of these already exist today: - batteries that do not need Li, Ni, Co, etc - like new "Na", "liquid metal", or old ones like "Pb-acid" - public transit systems that can be used not only in NYC or Toronto - Uber, Bolt and similar 'on demand' services that lower number of cars needed - similarly, self driving cars that are shared or loaned through the groups of people - older type of electronics that is not requiring rare earth elements, or lesser amount of them like Ge transistors or 200 nm Si chips Most important - I think Canada and to a degree USA is in a quite good shape regarding the problem, it won't affect us as hard as others.

[@jeffbenton6183]

We (US and Canada) have some of the worst public transit in the First World - we are *not* in good shape.

[@xanovaria]

Let’s be honest. We’re going to fight over these resources as they dwindle. Geopolitically, we need Canada - especially since you guys have most of the world’s Uranium for nuke plants and are our biggest supplier of potash (fertilizer). We’re going to end up trading food for oil, and fighting others for more. You’ve got good friends :) We might as well turn Canada into a US territory at this point. What’s the UK going to do?

[@hippopanotto]

I discovered this channel from the interview with Nate Hagens the other day, this one was even better. You mention a typical modern fear narrative of “getting back to nature” as a tragic loss of life with the standard allusion to infant mortality. Careful with that image, it’s a classic refrain from the Church of Progress. We in the modern world cling so desperately to the notion that a life “coupled with nature” was “nasty, brutish and short”. As you listen to Simon and begin to doubt the possibility of “decoupling” our society from its energy habits, the mind automatically goes to the past we so easily conquered and destroyed. I think most of us have no idea what was really lost, but there are still indigenous communities around the world who are fighting to tell us what is important about about that kind of “life coupled with all other life”. My point is that if you take Simon’s message that we very likely can’t produce the kind of energy we do now, then more people will have to be involved in local energy production. Society won’t support the level of job specialization we have, and human labor with food calories will become a non-negligible piece of the energy pie again. People are going to fear this notion as a tragic loss of progress, and that fear is going to get in the way of the best possible scenario where we still have some electricity and nice things, but we also have intact local communities that produce energy, food, diverse livelihoods with entertainment and beauty. Most importantly, by Recoupling to life and the ground, we may even catch a glimpse within a couple generations of what it means to belong to a place, to become indigenous once again. That doesn’t have to mean sticks and stones, indigenous actually means “to be born inside”. It’s the most beautiful and fulfilling path for our children and future generations. Not only are the hyper-technological visions of the future mere fairytales, they also mask the most likely scenario if we continue doing what we’re doing- the state (really the global elite) will become increasingly authoritarian and brutal as a reaction to the unraveling of society as we knew it. The failure of an unattainable vision is that we just have to react to the increasing rate and volatility of extreme globe disrupting events. Farming is a good life, and farming with a community that makes meaning out of its dependence on and stewardship of the lives surrounding us is what humans were born for.

[@Altralaltral]

Couldn't agree more.

[@Rnankn]

Agreed. Fewer people benefit from ‘progress’ than the people who do. And it takes a lot of propaganda to maintain public opinion in its favour. Plus the fact of some technology will be possible, along with stability and security people are lacking is added appeal.

[@eclipsenow5431]

Sorry to bust your doomer bubble - but Simon Michaux lied to you. While many brands CAN put rare earth’s into renewables and batteries, they do not HAVE to. Brands are increasingly dropping rare earths. EG: 95% of Solar uses silicon, wind iron, aluminium, and fibreglass, and batteries can be LFP (Lithium Iron Phosphate). The USGS reserves from 2022 show we have TEN TIMES the lithium we need for a world of 1.4 billion LPF EV's. Michaux's European studies about 4 weeks storage are now a decade out of date. Renewables then were TEN TIMES more expensive. These days you OVERBUILD. If winter halves your output, you just build DOUBLE the renewables! Duh! Most places can get their storage down to 2 days. This is EASY to do with Sodium - which is 30% cheaper than lithium AND is less toxic and fire prone. It's GREAT for grid storage. (But BYD are building their "Seagull" car with a sodium battery, which will be super-cheap, but only middle-range.) There’s over 5 MILLION TONS of sea-salt for every person on earth. Forget 4 weeks storage - you could probably store 4 DECADES with that kind of resource! (Not that I’ve done the math - just emphasising it's a LOT!) But want an example of how STUPID Michaux thinks we all are? He just assumes we will not check this stuff. Remember Michaux rejected the cheapest grid storage, which is pumped-hydro? He claims there are difficulties finding enough sites. Really? What study is that based on? From the horse's mouth: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gnPaY4KMjMmKf7M He cherry-picked a feasibility study about SINGAPORE! A good pumped hydro site is 500 to 600 meters high. If you triple the height, you halve the cost. Singapore is a tiny flat island. There biggest hill? 15 metres high. Gee - I wonder why they had “siting issues!” (Facepalm!) He applies these findings to the WHOLE WORLD. It’s such a breathtaking lie I call it “Painting the world Singapore.” I don't know if he's dumb or devious - but ignore him at all costs.

[@eclipsenow5431]

@@Altralaltral Couldn't disagree more. Sorry to bust your doomer bubble - but Simon Michaux lied to you. While many brands CAN put rare earth’s into renewables and batteries, they do not HAVE to. Brands are increasingly dropping rare earths. EG: 95% of Solar uses silicon, wind iron, aluminium, and fibreglass, and batteries can be LFP (Lithium Iron Phosphate). The USGS reserves from 2022 show we have TEN TIMES the lithium we need for a world of 1.4 billion LPF EV's. Michaux's European studies about 4 weeks storage are now a decade out of date. Renewables then were TEN TIMES more expensive. These days you OVERBUILD. If winter halves your output, you just build DOUBLE the renewables! Duh! Most places can get their storage down to 2 days. This is EASY to do with Sodium - which is 30% cheaper than lithium AND is less toxic and fire prone. It's GREAT for grid storage. (But BYD are building their "Seagull" car with a sodium battery, which will be super-cheap, but only middle-range.) There’s over 5 MILLION TONS of sea-salt for every person on earth. Forget 4 weeks storage - you could probably store 4 DECADES with that kind of resource! (Not that I’ve done the math - just emphasising it's a LOT!) But want an example of how STUPID Michaux thinks we all are? He just assumes we will not check this stuff. Remember Michaux rejected the cheapest grid storage, which is pumped-hydro? He claims there are difficulties finding enough sites. Really? What study is that based on? From the horse's mouth: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gnPaY4KMjMmKf7M He cherry-picked a feasibility study about SINGAPORE! A good pumped hydro site is 500 to 600 meters high. If you triple the height, you halve the cost. Singapore is a tiny flat island. There biggest hill? 15 metres high. Gee - I wonder why they had “siting issues!” (Facepalm!) He applies these findings to the WHOLE WORLD. It’s such a breathtaking lie I call it “Painting the world Singapore.” I don't know if he's dumb or devious - but ignore him at all costs.

[@eclipsenow5431]

@@jeffsim3327 We've domesticated large flora and fauna - but what if we went micro and domesticated tiny bacteria and yeasts? If we're not afraid of bread, cheese, yoghurt, beer or wine, or insulin, we shouldn’t be afraid of the BIGGEST change in food in 10,000 years - and that’s Precision Fermentation (PF). I see it as changing how we get sunlight. Instead of sunlight into a plant (photosynthesis at 6% efficiency) and then only eating a tiny part of that plant - what if we used solar panels which are 20% efficient with the sunlight, split water into hydrogen, and fed that to bacteria? Covering HALF our rooftops in solar would provide all the electricity we need - the other half would go a good way into electrifying industry and transport. Then there's floating solar panels on our man-made fresh water reservoirs, which could give us 10 TIMES the electricity we need! It also keeps the solar panel cool and efficient, and helps prevent evaporation of our precious water reserves and reduces sunlight which form algal blooms. Basically, covering our rooftops and fresh water reservoirs in solar is 12 TIMES the electricity we need - and we haven't discussed wind power yet. So there's PLENTY of potential area for solar without impacting land yet. And PF turns this solar into food. This is a 3 minute primer. kzbin.info/www/bejne/sGndpqSIbpqZp6M "Brave Robot" has sold millions of tubs of ice cream and cream cheese and packets of cake mix. "Perfect Day" and Israel's "Remilk" are fermenting up dairy proteins for milk and cheese and yogurt - but without cholesterol or lactose! And now “C16 Biosciences” are brewing up a replacement for Palm Oil! Palm Oil is in everything. British environmental write George Monbiot gets it. “When they are bred to produce specific proteins and fats, they can create much better replacements than plant products for meat, fish, milk and eggs. And they have the potential to do two astonishing things…” Please read this article and check youtube for Precision Fermentation. It’s the biggest leap forward since agriculture or the invention of writing! www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/nov/24/green-technology-precision-fermentation-farming Basically, instead of using 40% of the land on earth to graze livestock, our cities will have factories that brew up whatever proteins we need. We can return all that land to nature, let 3 TRILLION trees regrow and get CO2 down to normal levels.

[@DavidRose-m8s]

I have been interested in the reality's for a while. I would say if you want to prepare for more limited use of resource's you should try using your push bike for a week. That would allow a better appreciation of the problem, and where you need to be to live a good life in another 20 years.

[@xanovaria]

Absolutely. This is motivating me to make and save as much as possible. I don’t want to be worried about having to walk to the doctor at 75 years old.

[@greggsenne1268]

An average donkey can carry 50 kg on its back and pull about 300 kg on level ground. An equivalent capacity for the Bingham mine would be around 300,000 donkeys. Mine trucks can travel at about 40 mph. Donkeys at about 4 mph.

[@pepclotas8153]

good point! i think it's time to run

[@vincentkosik403]

I wish we were back 🙏 in the 1978s energy crisis..Things were so much simpler back then...

[@bentray1908]

I don't think the full scale nuclear civilization model has been properly contemplated by Simon

[@queny2]

Why do you think he is wrong about full scale nuclear? What is your source on that?

[@Withnail1969]

nuclear power is an accessory of a fossil fuel powered system. When fossil fuels go away, so does nuclear.

[@swamivardana9911]

Where is the Uranium.

[@sophieau683]

@@swamivardana9911 and the concrete and the steel and everything else to build those plants. The ciment production of the future is not talk about much. Clean energy topic is a huge rabbit hole.

[@frankw2900]

Is that you propose?

[@thomasd2444]

42:42 - In 2019 , the world mined 95,170 tons of Lithium

[@johnmaitel351]

silly question? on the batterie issue for mining trucks.. what about the idea of swappable batteries? is there any techical impossibilities to this? would this idea in general be a solution to reduce need for buffer also for general transportation (IE not have everyone charging at night when there s no sun)

[@felipearbustopotd]

I saw a KZbin upload showing this in operation, sadly it was animated. Suffice to say, the notion is there, but if those that finance it, see it as a no return on investment then, no green light.

[@jeffbenton6183]

It's a neat idea, but part of the problem is the sheer weight of the batteries. The energy required the haul the weight of the vehicle alone is going to increase, so it's useful load is going to decrease. Basically, the larger the vehicle, the worse solution any type of battery becomes. That said, I was curious to see if he would mention s solution I thought of while listening to his previous interview: fuel cells. Instead of a diesel generator-charged electric motor, use a fuel cell to charge the motor. A fuel cell is going to be more weight and volume efficient thant a generator and will have fewer moving parts, etc. The downside is that the fuel (natural gas or hydrogen) is going to be sparser than liquid, petroleum-based fuel (even in a cryogenic liquid state, which might itself be impractical for this application). Clearly there's some engineering work which must be done for this to become viable, but it's probably a more promising route than batteries (even with frequent swapping). He did mention fuel cells, while he was discussing cars, so maybe it's viable here, too.

[@johnmaitel351]

@@jeffbenton6183 recently I learned more about synthetic fuels, I think they could be a very good solution for all heavy fossil fuel engine replacement such as mining rigs, container carrying ships ect.. look up for example terraform industries, they claim to be lowtech and very close to compete with natural gas already in price. The idea is plugging solar panels directly into electrolyzer and Sabatier reactor, and capture from the air the co2 needed to make methane that would be carbon neutral. Sounds like maybe a good way to get to carbon neutrality without rebuilding everything, as a partial solution at least?

[@wheel-man5319]

​@@jeffbenton6183cng powered longhaul rigs are being implemented in China as fast as China can make them.

[@aliendroneservices6621]

25:18 25:28 *_"As of 2023, there are 1.49 billion cars in operation worldwide,_* including 1.11 billion passenger cars and 380 million commercial vehicles."

[@edgeman148]

Bamboo, Hemp and let's not forget, Willow.

[@Withnail1969]

what about them? you don't imagine that such things could replace more than a fraction of one percent of what we get from fossil fuels, do you?

[@A3Kr0n]

Since we won't choose the better plan, what's next?

[@grahamt5924]

This is scary. It feels like we have no plausible plan, and it will get horrible at some point.

[@sophieau683]

We will run out of accessible oil to be able to extract it.

[@cs3818919]

Reality will set in and humans will do what they need to do which is continue to use fossil fuels. Western countries will probably plunge themselves into poverty for this pipe dream but the Russians and Chinese probably won't follow us into the pit.

[@thomasd2444]

37:43 - 37:55 - 38:08 - I got taken to the wood shed 38:35 - Straight engineering calculation . . . no modeling

[@SamuelBlackMetalRider]

You MUST find a way to interview JEAN-MARC JANKOVICI the French engineer who basically invented the notion of CARBON FOOTPRINT. He is the French equivalent of Dr Michaux. A semi-Legend in France. He can speak English, he makes dozens of lectures & talks every year. Like Dr Michaux, super casual guy, super chill and with a TON of knowledge & convincing.

[@davidwalker2942]

Have you considered the inefficiency of the battery charging process for electric vehicles?

[@wheel-man5319]

Not many do. But so far as I know, it's significant and gets more intense the faster you charge the battery.

[@Seawithinyou]

Also I see there is a serious shortage of Rubber too

[@vincentkosik403]

Everything is about money and the Banking system is predatory..Simons words

[@queny2]

Legacy stuff that's reliable and old not getting maintained. Looking at you, Hydro Dams in NZ! Still, this is a bit of a SHTF moment, so one little countries grid is neither here nor there, (except for me it's here).

[@stewiewilliamson1541]

Simon is a fountain of knowledge and unafraid to take a stand. I would prefer he stay on topics that he knows well. When he strays into politics and finance his inexperience and emotional reactions gets him to make statements that are questionable

[@Fox-in-sox]

I’ve noticed this trend with other guests.

[@catherinebanks6420]

We have already burned through our 1.5 C target. The current atmospheric CO2 equivalent concentration is at 508 ppm, which corresponds to an equilibrium global average warming of 2.7°C by around 2100 (Peter Carter and Bill McGuire).

[@Rnankn]

The target was always arbitrary. We’re playing with fire regardless. No matter how terrible warming gets, it can always get more terrible. So we should always be striving to lower and eliminate emissions. That’s the only way to have a terrible future, instead of a really terrible future.

[@aliendroneservices6621]

​@@Rnankn *_Non sequitur_*

[@swamivardana9911]

So what. What is your point.

[@thomasd2444]

19:52 - The E.U.C-Bank who charters all For-Money-Profit-Lending firms exclaims we have no money 20:02 - The E.U.C-Bank is creating [ The needed money-numbers ] on the Q.T.

[@jvarella01]

Incerdiabile!

[@thomasd2444]

24:02 - What my study has done . . .

[@Unborn.x]

Peak oil is like peak coal. Still plenty of coal. CO2 is good.

[@terenceiutzi4003]

And 1,000 times as much fossil fuel to build the renewabes!

[@frankblangeard8865]

Towards the end it is announced that the 'Better Plan' will be discussed in a future episode. 58:05

[@dadmezz4024]

We all will need to be victory gardens and not useless cunsumers.

[@rickricky5626]

short answer is we will fail........prepare for impact

[@Rnankn]

That would make it easy. It’s not a black or white, succeed or fail problem. We still need to do this, because it will just keep getting worse forever until we do. And once we do, we can stabilize at that level of terrible, avoiding even more terrible paths.

[@eclipsenow5431]

Sorry to bust your doomer bubble - but Simon Michaux lied to you. While many brands CAN put rare earth’s into renewables and batteries, they do not HAVE to. Brands are increasingly dropping rare earths. EG: 95% of Solar uses silicon, wind iron, aluminium, and fibreglass, and batteries can be LFP (Lithium Iron Phosphate). The USGS reserves from 2022 show we have TEN TIMES the lithium we need for a world of 1.4 billion LPF EV's. Michaux's European studies about 4 weeks storage are now a decade out of date. Renewables then were TEN TIMES more expensive. These days you OVERBUILD. If winter halves your output, you just build DOUBLE the renewables! Duh! Most places can get their storage down to 2 days. This is EASY to do with Sodium - which is 30% cheaper than lithium AND is less toxic and fire prone. It's GREAT for grid storage. (But BYD are building their "Seagull" car with a sodium battery, which will be super-cheap, but only middle-range.) There’s over 5 MILLION TONS of sea-salt for every person on earth. Forget 4 weeks storage - you could probably store 4 DECADES with that kind of resource! (Not that I’ve done the math - just emphasising it's a LOT!) But want an example of how STUPID Michaux thinks we all are? He just assumes we will not check this stuff. Remember Michaux rejected the cheapest grid storage, which is pumped-hydro? He claims there are difficulties finding enough sites. Really? What study is that based on? From the horse's mouth: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gnPaY4KMjMmKf7M He cherry-picked a feasibility study about SINGAPORE! A good pumped hydro site is 500 to 600 meters high. If you triple the height, you halve the cost. Singapore is a tiny flat island. There biggest hill? 15 metres high. Gee - I wonder why they had “siting issues!” (Facepalm!) He applies these findings to the WHOLE WORLD. It’s such a breathtaking lie I call it “Painting the world Singapore.” I don't know if he's dumb or devious - but ignore him at all costs.

[@thomasd2444]

19:32 - Whoever moves first 19:40 - For-Money-Profit-Lending firms, chartered by their employer the E.U.C-Bank _________ Tells their employer: You make the market & we For-Money-Profit-Lending firms _________ who work for you will then take over when there is no risk

[@BelisarioHRomo]

Conclusion: Based on facts and the analysis of fuel sources and their carbon emissions, it is evident that there are currently NO fuels that can be considered truly "fossil free" fuels, or even close to NET OR ZERO carbon-free. When "clean energy" and fuel processing, including biofuels are burned, they release carbon dioxide (CO2) and other added emissions into the atmosphere. This fact underscores the inherent impossibility of achieving carbon-free fuels, as the combustion process of carbon-based biofuels inherently produces more CO2. While "alternative fuels" like biofuels "may or may not" (lawyerly nauseating uncompromising diatribe) "offer" false lower carbon emissions compared to traditional fossil fuels, they are IN FACT more carbon-intensive. Figures. The production and use of biofuels still involve massive energy inputs, derived from fossil fuel sources, resulting in direct carbon emissions. Therefore, the answer to whether there are real "fossil fuels free" clean and absolutely carbon-free biofuels is NO! In fact biofuels contribute more carbon emissions compared to fossil fuels, and augmented carbon footprint. All chat di chat about "clean energies, Net Zero, towards, sustainability, etc".... is just a scam and a very profitable chat di chat!!

[@clairegilead292]

So there won’t be anywhere near so many vehicles. Not enough electricity for our needs. A colder, poorer, more limited life for us proles!

[@davidwilkie9551]

Did someone say, to any scientific articles that begins with a question, the answer is typically NO. Every thing in holography is all-ways all-at-once coherence-cohesion sync-duration resonance quantization cause-effect, so "it's all happening", just to make non sense of natural mono-dualistic ambiguity.. IMHO, Nucleation of temporal sense-in-common cause-effect is to Know your Self, and e-Pi-i is the absolutely true mechanism of Eternity-now. Having grown up in a Mining Town and been to another of the modern equivalent, a compact integration of mine, refine and Electrify around the right size and design of Reactor for the location, is going to happen, so start yesterday.

[@tinoyb9294]

Anyone heard of the aerosol masking effect? This is analysis paralysis. Start conserving energy and water. Humans are so wasteful.

[@bellakrinkle9381]

Humans are so unconscious.

[@vincentkosik403]

Yes Professor Guy McPherson has pointed it out repeatedly

[@vincentkosik403]

Shock doctrine...these guys don't care about misery.. Make money without rules

[@graemetunbridge1738]

I think the flaw in this argument is that it is assumed that we continue to waste power as if it were cheap. Instead we can retransport our cities with active transport ( making cities much better places ) and generate electricity mostly from roof top solar etc etc. We can't keep doing the same dum stuff. I think we have ended up with the same conclusion.

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

Extra capacity in the national grid, transmission and distribution grids. Raw materials and CO2 to meet the quintuple (×5) capacity increased capacity may be a problem. For the world. And financing and decades and military defence budgets. And expensive highly trained manpower on 3 shifts 365 days ....

[@frankw2900]

Is the viewer expected to just absorb all this? I'm willing to pay for knowledge. A primer in relevant topics could be useful to voters and viewers. Hydrogen production (and transportation and conversion seem deliriously impractical on multiple fronts) appears a grift. Who's going to do what, where, how, for whom? Cost? A primer should brief. 20 pages, 40? 50?

[@markwrede8878]

It's not impossible. That it's not investor competitive is the obstacle. Private ownership is the troll on the crossroads demanding tribute, as Adam Smith observed.

[@VK4VO]

Approx 10 tons of coal per 300w panel is used

[@wheel-man5319]

Amazing!

[@iancormie9916]

By finance class, you mean the parasites.

[@h.e.hazelhorst9838]

Indeed, fascinating interview! My question to dr Michaux: are we doomed, or what? I look around, see all the people happily going out and have fun, but then I live in a corner of the world (NW Europe) where the impact of climate change is perhaps the least felt. And we are incredibly wealthy. The problem: the sense of urgency is still absent with most people. Once the crisis hits us, we start to panic and that’s not a good starting point.

[@translumination2002]

You always interrupt when he starts saying something really interesting.

[@keepitreal2902]

The Mirai does not use battery power. It uses a hydrogen fuel cell.

[@aliendroneservices6621]

26:30 Which makes it *_electric._*

[@keepitreal2902]

@@aliendroneservices6621 He talked about battery minerals for a fuel cell vehicle. It's nonsensical. It might be electric, but calculating battery mineral requirements for a car that doesn't need them makes it nonsense.

[@meflower]

What fossil fuels actually do for us? - I hope he gets around to giving a talk on this. Much needed.

[@sophieau683]

every aspect of your life is tied to fossil fuels.

[@GeorgeTsiros]

@@sophieau683 suffocating thought, yes?

[@wheel-man5319]

A better person to discuss fossil fuels is Alex Epstein.

[@thomasd2444]

14:05 -

[@BobQuigley]

My question would be what number of humans fit the models? Today we're 8 billion precious humans and every year another 80 million net new precious humans join us. Clearly this cannot continue

[@psikeyhackr6914]

How does planned obsolescence affect that? Manufacturer garbage that doesn't last and has to be replaced. Then our brilliant economists do not compute and report the annual depreciation of automobiles and other durable consumer junk. What is Net Domestic Product? Where is consumer depreciation in that equation?

[@user-nx6ji9tk8i]

Three D printing for lithium! Yay - that.s my joke! But ask your politicians what their plans are for mining….. or ask if they are proficient in basic maths.

[@swamivardana9911]

I don't see any problem. AT ALL. Just accept that electricity will be 2 hours a day most of the time. Poverty solves many problems. Go ahead zero America.

[@wheel-man5319]

You go to zero first. Prove it works, others may follow.

[@tonywilson4713]

ENGINEER HERE: There's parts of this I absolutely agree with Simon Michaux and other times I want to scream at him because there are a number of things he's not only *WRONG* but very seriously *WRONG.* I'm NOT from the power industry but do a lot of electrical engineering as as control system and automation engineer. I discovered Australia's major problem during a small consulting job in 2016/17, which I then found out was a problem across most of the developed world. One thing he's absolutely right about is the lack of action by *BOTH* governments and the Financial & Investment Sectors. One thing he's CONSISTENTLY WRONG are the engineering solutions available and what we can do versus efficiency. He's way too obsessed with efficiency rather than what can be practically done. Like almost everyone who wants to make a point he cherry picks data at times. He's dead right on how much material we'll need to do things like replace 1.5 Billion ICE cars with 1.5 Billion EV cars *BUT what he NEVER SAYS is that we don't need to replace most of those cars we just need to replace the drive systems in those cars.* There's a staggering amount of energy consumed making a brand new car from scratch. People forget all the stuff in cars - seats, carpet, plastics, electronics, wires, sensors, tires,.... and all that stuff needs energy and resources. You have to dig up a lot of stuff, as Simon points out. You then have to process all that stuff which uses a lot of energy, as Simon points out. BUT IF WE DON'T have to dig up or recycle all that stuff WE SAVE massive amounts of energy and resources. ANOTHER THING Simon fails to mention is the German experience with renewables. The Germans spent a reported €1.3 Trillion on renewables. They then turned OFF their nuclear power stations (NPSs) and then had to run their Coal Fired Power Stations (CFPSs) flat out. Instead of their Carbon Dioxide (CO2) emissions going down they went up. Its maybe one of the stupidest things any nation has ever done, BUT their engineers did work some things out. One major thing they worked out is that wind and solar are typically better at different times of the day. Solar obviously works in daylight. Wind is best at night. This is most notable near large bodies of water. During the day the sun heats up the land which by late afternoon causes a seas breeze. In some places like Perth (Western Australia) these seas breezes are incredibly reliable. Normally we have to install around 2.2 Kw of renewable for every 1 Kw of coal turned off. The Germans found that if the solar and wind systems ARE BALANCED that 2.2 can come down to 1.7 (~25%) and when you are spending several Trillion dollars or Euros 25% is a very big number. The other major issue the Germans found was storage. When Simon says wind is only generating around 24% of the time he neglects to say WHY and the WHY is very important. A lot of the downtime for wind is because its TOO WINDY on SUNNY DAYS. Energy grids are a zero sum game for every kilowatt that's pumped into the grid it has to go somewhere. Some of it is lost in heat and the rest we do work with. If you just keep pumping energy in and don't use it then the grid can become overpowered and that's dangerous because things can pop and catch fire or explode. This is what the Germans really found out about renewables. If there is NOT a extensive storage system with both sort and long term technologies its just NOT as efficient or economical as it could or should be. The economic argument is quite obtuse and at first seems illogical. The worst time economically for renewables is NOT when there's no sun and no wind but when there's TOO MUCH wind and sun. *Irrespective of who invested the money to put up the turbine or solar panel there's times they can't make any money because there's nowhere to send the power.* Simon talks about economics at times but for some reason either doesn't know this or ignores this. What we need are massive storage systems that can store energy for months and so far the only system that has been used is pumped hydro and the problem there is geography. Yes sure there's 1,000s of places where pumped hydro can go but many are so far off grid they are NOT PRACTICAL. The large scale battery systems might be great for putting close to existing grid points but they are expensive, not as efficient as some claim and worst of all need massive amounts of materials which is something Simon is 100% right about. Even worse than that every lithium battery bolted to the ground or side of a house is a lithium battery that's NOT in a car. My personnel opinion is we need to put all the excess energy, irrespective of where it comes from into hydrogen. The battery systems will never be big enough but we will need some of them. YES I AM AWARE that hydrogen has issues, but its storable with a long shelf life and its also transportable. As for the technical issues with hydrogen we ALREADY have solutions for all of them.

[@GeorgeTsiros]

ICE cars are designed from the ground up to be ICE cars _and nothing else_ generally speaking, it is impossible to take a car and replace its powertrain with a battery electric It is not just the parts that require replacement: it is the certification and safety that is impacted. It may very well be more expensive to convert one than recycle its materials to manufacture a new battery electric one

[@tonywilson4713]

@@GeorgeTsiros If you don't like being called a DlCKHEAD then don't spout utter nonsense. People have been converting cars to electric for years. Its not industrialised by any measure but people are doing it all over the world.

[@paulsiebert4863]

27:30

[@lawrencetaylor4101]

Why does Simon keep saying we have to replace today's levels of electricity and energy? I did learn how our society did a WW2-like approach to moving to fracking and tar sands, and everything had to increase over 6 fold. Infrastructure since each frack site has hundreds of branches, with pipelines, steel, millions of tons of toxic chemicals, plus all the energy and electricity during all phases of their cycle. Plus a frack site needs to be financed with a 30 year ROI, but is worthless after 2 to 5 years. So they sell it to pension funds or other banks, and we have a financial crisis in 2008. Simon will talk about the YUGE machines used for mining, especially uranium and coal mines and their needs of electricity and he scoffs that renewables won't be able to provide that power. Why would we need to replace that requirement, because our society would automatically downsize by reducing their use. These guys are gaslighting you when they talk nuclear. They never talk about the diesel needed to mine the uranium.

[@sonnyeastham]

Don't forget Biden Nord Stream

[@paulwhetstone0473]

It should be called THE GREEN NEW STEAL.

[@wheel-man5319]

10% for the big guy!!

[@janklaas6885]

17:18 ‼️‼️ thats why we go extinct

[@eclipsenow5431]

Sorry to bust your doomer bubble - but Simon Michaux lied to you. While many brands CAN put rare earth’s into renewables and batteries, they do not HAVE to. Brands are increasingly dropping rare earths. EG: 95% of Solar uses silicon, wind iron, aluminium, and fibreglass, and batteries can be LFP (Lithium Iron Phosphate). The USGS reserves from 2022 show we have TEN TIMES the lithium we need for a world of 1.4 billion LPF EV's. Michaux's European studies about 4 weeks storage are now a decade out of date. Renewables then were TEN TIMES more expensive. These days you OVERBUILD. If winter halves your output, you just build DOUBLE the renewables! Duh! Most places can get their storage down to 2 days. This is EASY to do with Sodium - which is 30% cheaper than lithium AND is less toxic and fire prone. It's GREAT for grid storage. (But BYD are building their "Seagull" car with a sodium battery, which will be super-cheap, but only middle-range.) There’s over 5 MILLION TONS of sea-salt for every person on earth. Forget 4 weeks storage - you could probably store 4 DECADES with that kind of resource! (Not that I’ve done the math - just emphasising it's a LOT!) But want an example of how STUPID Michaux thinks we all are? He just assumes we will not check this stuff. Remember Michaux rejected the cheapest grid storage, which is pumped-hydro? He claims there are difficulties finding enough sites. Really? What study is that based on? From the horse's mouth: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gnPaY4KMjMmKf7M He cherry-picked a feasibility study about SINGAPORE! A good pumped hydro site is 500 to 600 meters high. If you triple the height, you halve the cost. Singapore is a tiny flat island. There biggest hill? 15 metres high. Gee - I wonder why they had “siting issues!” (Facepalm!) He applies these findings to the WHOLE WORLD. It’s such a breathtaking lie I call it “Painting the world Singapore.” I don't know if he's dumb or devious - but ignore him at all costs.

[@frankw2900]

All this knowledge (i.e., this body of work by Dr. Keefer and his guests) needs to be dated because it is evolving . The viewer needs the gauge of time.

[@isn0t42]

Guys, degrowth is death. Call it for what it is. And in the long term extinction.

[@wheel-man5319]

When the 'elites' can no longer enforce their death cult then the remainder of the human race will get back to following God's command to multiply and fill the earth.