Tag Archives: Elon Musk

Climate Solutions, Earth and Ecology, Economics, Esoteric, Observation, Sustainable Energy

The Earthly Frontier: Building a Sustainable Future at Home

Solar Power: Harnessing Our Local Star

The pioneering spirit driving Elon Musk’s SpaceX to prepare for life on Mars is captivating, but a compelling alternative suggests we should use this same spirit to heal and nurture our home planet.

The sun, our local star, is central to this Earth-centric vision. According to NASA, Earth receives approximately 174 petawatts of incoming solar radiation in the upper atmosphere.

By efficiently harnessing just a fraction of this energy, we could significantly reduce our dependence on environmentally harmful fossil fuels.

Over the past decade, the cost of solar power has dramatically decreased and, with improvements in energy storage, (like Tesla’s Powerwall units, for example), solar energy is becoming a reliable, 24/7 power source.

Ephemeralization: Doing More with Less

However, the shift towards sustainable living extends beyond changing our energy source. This is where the principles of R. Buckminster Fuller, a visionary architect, systems theorist, author, designer, and inventor, come into play.

Fuller proposed the concept of “doing more with less,” forecasting a future where technological advancements lead to “ephemeralization,” a scenario in which we could fulfill everyone’s needs using fewer resources. This notion could help pave the way for a more environmentally sustainable world that also addresses issues of scarcity and inequality.

Building Efficiency: Embracing Integrative Design

Our journey towards a sustainable future is complemented by the principles of “integrative design,” a concept championed by Amory Lovins, co-founder of the Rocky Mountain Institute.

Lovins’ approach focuses on a holistic systems design where individual components work together in synergy, maximizing energy and resource efficiency.

This concept applies prominently to building efficiency, an area where Lovins has made significant contributions. By considering elements such as orientation, insulation, window placement, and ventilation, buildings can be designed to maintain comfortable temperatures with minimal active heating or cooling.

This “passive house” approach dramatically reduces energy consumption, making buildings part of the climate solution rather than a source of the problem.

Lovins’ approach also applies to manufacturing and industry, which, together, account for over 40% of total U.S. energy consumption.

By redesigning industrial processes to minimize waste, utilize waste heat, and prioritize energy-efficient equipment, Lovins argues that industries can dramatically reduce their energy use without sacrificing output or quality.

Taken to the furthest logical conclusion, the principles of integrative design could revolutionize how we conceive of energy use across all sectors.

Circular Economy and Soil Regeneration: Emulating Nature’s Cycle

To create a genuinely sustainable society, we need to redefine our economic systems and our relationship with the land. Our shift must be from a linear economic model—where we extract, use, and discard resources—to a circular one that mimics nature’s endless cycles of growth, decay, and renewal.

The Ellen MacArthur Foundation has been instrumental in leading efforts to establish an economy that is restorative and regenerative by design.

A key part of this shift involves regenerating our agricultural systems. Soil health is vital for maintaining biodiversity, water quality, and carbon sequestration.

Regenerative agriculture, including practices like cover cropping, no-till farming, and composting, can restore soil health and enhance its capacity to absorb carbon from the atmosphere.

According to the Rodale Institute, if current farmlands globally shifted to regenerative organic practices, it could sequester more than 100% of current annual CO2 emissions. Transitioning towards such practices could significantly mitigate climate change and rejuvenate our food systems.

Economic Justice: Power to All

An Earth-centric future also calls for economic justice. In a world powered by the sun, where resources are used wisely, waste is minimized, and the soil is restored, basic needs—such as healthcare, education, and equal opportunity—could be universally provided.

Establishing these rights is not just about altruism—it’s about creating a society where every individual can fully contribute to the collective good.

Mars Can Wait, But Can Earth?

The dream of a city on Mars is undoubtedly inspiring, but we must not overlook the opportunities beneath our feet. Our planet is not merely a stepping stone to the stars; it is a star in its own right.

Mars can wait, but can the Earth? With the elements for a sustainable revolution already within our grasp, it’s up to us to weave them together, creating a future that embraces both sustainability and economic justice.

The Long Road to an Earthly Future

The real odyssey, the true journey that demands our audacity and pioneering spirit, lies not in the red sands of a distant planet or under the shadows of unfamiliar stars. Instead, it unravels here, beneath the azure sky and upon the rich, verdant expanses of our home, Earth.

This journey may be long and fraught with challenges. The road toward a sustainable, just, and abundant future will require us to reassess our values, reinvent our systems, and redefine our relationship with the environment.

It calls for us to weave together principles of ephemeralization, integrative design, circular economy, soil regeneration, and economic justice into the fabric of our societies.

Yet, even as we embark on this formidable quest, we should remember that the destination is not merely a point in the future. It is a process, a continuous evolution that offers us countless opportunities for growth, learning, and reinvention.

Every step we take towards this envisioned future—whether it’s a solar panel installed, a passive house built, or a plot of land regenerated—brings us closer to realizing our potential as a species.

Unlike the cold, alien landscapes of Mars, the Earth provides us with a setting that is intimately familiar yet brimming with untapped potential.

We have the knowledge, the technology, and the means. All we need now is the collective will to channel our exploratory spirit inward, to heal, nurture, and transform the world we already have.

So let the red planet wait. For now, we have an extraordinary world under our feet, a world that we are yet to fully comprehend and appreciate.

Our gaze should not be fixed on distant celestial bodies, but on the potential lying dormant in our societies and within ourselves. The future of humanity is not just out there in the cosmos, but also right here, on the third rock from the Sun. The Earth and its promise of a sustainable and equitable future, is real, and attainable.

Climate Solutions, Earth and Ecology, Observation, Sustainable Energy

Beating the Heatwaves: a Sensual Solution to Satisfy your Limbic System

Energy efficiency is sending a love letter to your amygdala

If you take a Tesla on a test drive at the HQ located next to SpaceX in Hawthorne, CA you’ll find yourself behind the wheel and, once you are strapped in, your official co-pilot will suggest one thing immediately. “Try pushing the pedal to metal, once, if you want to feel the g-force”, he or she will say.

When you do as suggested, you’ll be shocked at the torque and sudden acceleration, as you slam back against the head-rest and your face turns nearly liquid. That’s how the limbic system and the human need for sensual gratification becomes enamored with something “boring” like an EV.

It’s an example of how Tesla and Elon Musk transformed the auto trade, and brought the term “limbic resonance marketing” into the lexicon of contemporary speech.

While this all sounds thrilling and harmless, this kind of magical behavioral manipulation is missing, and desperately needed, for the next most important area in the transition to a sustainable economy: built-world upgrades and energy efficient retrofits (EE Retrofits for short).

The built environment, a sector that contributes approximately 40% of global carbon emissions, is one area where urgent action can have a dramatic impact. Specifically, the EE retrofitting of existing buildings and homes represents a remarkable opportunity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Our collective preoccupation with the immediate, the easily marketable, and the visibly green overlooks a profound truth: energy efficiency is more than just about using less energy—it’s about achieving the same level of comfort, productivity, stimulation and even joy, with less. At scale it could mean a new energy economy, one that prioritizes living benefits, not just the ability to burn and combust fossilized plant matter as a path to living large.

Think of the energy system as a gourmet meal. The LED lights, the low-flow shower-heads, the energy-efficient heating and cooling appliances—they’re the condiments. They add flavor, they’re necessary, but they’re not the main course.

The main course is the EE retrofit—an ambitious reimagining of our existing buildings that holistically incorporates energy-saving measures, such as those that meet the passive house standard, including insulation, air sealing, HVAC upgrades, and high-performance windows. This means we could be needing fewer heat pumps, less energy production, fewer solar PV panels, a transition less dependent on grid expansion or upgrades.

The added spice to this gourmet meal, the pièce de résistance if you will, is a stunning architectural integration that enhances the building’s value beyond its pre-retrofit counterpart. This is where long-term thinking and smart design meet, offering not only reduced energy consumption, but a high-performing, aesthetically pleasing living or working environment.

Deep value and abundance by design

It’s important to note that this isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution—each building has its own unique challenges and opportunities. What’s necessary is a model that allows for that flexibility while still pushing for the highest efficiency.

An integrative design process that involves owners, architects, engineers, contractors, and building operators from the earliest stages can ensure that energy efficiency measures are built into the very fabric of the design, rather than tacked on as an afterthought.

We can no longer afford to take the path of least resistance. The climate crisis demands ambitious, long-term solutions. Retrofitting our existing buildings, first, to be more energy efficient is a significant step in that direction. We just need to make sure we’re aiming for the main course, and not settling for the condiments.

How can an energy realignment excite and stimulate?

In a world enthralled by the allure of the ‘next big thing,’ it’s easy to get lost in the narrative that technology alone will guide us through the current environmental crisis.

There’s an understandable, if somewhat misguided, emphasis on the simple mass production and consumption of green tech—solar panels, heat pump HVAC units, and electric cars. It’s a straight line thesis that is the stuff of future-world dreams, the kind that Silicon Valley venture capitalists find irresistibly compelling.

Public subsidies and venture capital investments, unfortunately, often narrowly follow this line of thinking, pouring billions into the manufacturing and implementation of these technologies.

Governments around the globe are eager to foster the expansion of these industries, both as a means of curbing carbon emissions and as a strategy for economic growth. But what if this focus on producing ‘green’ technology is diverting resources from a solution that could be even more impactful—increasing the energy efficiency of existing buildings?

There is an inconvenient truth in the realm of energy efficiency. The greatest potential for reducing our energy use and mitigating greenhouse gas emissions is not in the new gizmos we can attach to our homes, but in transforming the energy performance of the buildings themselves. As the saying goes, the greenest building is the one that’s already built.

The enemy of the good is not perfection: it’s a solution that solves nearly nothing

Ironically, many government subsidies are skewed towards upgrades to mechanical and electrical systems, but neglect to cover improvements in energy efficiency.

The result is that while buildings may be equipped with the latest in green technology, they remain fundamentally inefficient, their new solar panels and heat pumps mere band-aids masking the core issues.

Imagine pouring water into a leaky bucket—the more water you pour in, the more it continues to leak out. You can keep pouring faster and faster, or you can fix the leaks. The latter is undoubtedly more effective, and yet, our current approach to energy efficiency often looks like the former.

The remedy lies in comprehensive energy retrofits. Rather than attaching green tech appendages to inefficient structures, we should focus first on overhauling the buildings themselves, making them more efficient and reducing the energy demand.

A highly insulated and airtight building, for instance, such as one upgraded to passive house standards, requires fewer solar PV panels and smaller, less energy-intensive HVAC systems.

These upgrades are often seen to have higher upfront costs, which, when compared to doing nothing is a subjective assessment. But the long-term benefits of EE retrofits— in terms of energy savings, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, and improved indoor environmental quality— are enormous.

And if we redirected even a fraction of the funds currently being funneled into green tech appliances towards deep energy retrofits, as a first step, we could begin to tackle this issue on a significant scale.

The path forward requires a paradigm shift, one that repositions energy efficiency buildings as the cornerstone of our response to the climate crisis.

We need to realign our funding mechanisms, from venture capital to public subsidies, to prioritize energy efficiency.

In the end, the greenest future might not be the one filled with the shiniest new technology, but the one in which we learned to use less, waste less, and value our existing resources more. It’s a future that’s within our grasp—if we choose to reach for it.

The first step, just as takes place on a Tesla test drive, is to push the pedal hard and find ways to demonstrate the sensual gratification and technical superiority of an indoor world that is designed for a better, more exciting future.

Elon Musk, Entertainment, TikTok

Elon Musk leaving Twitter (X-Corp) for… TikTok?

Is this a sign of things to come?

Elon Musk’s business journey began with an X. After co-founding Zip2 and X.com (which later became PayPal), he continues to favor “X”.

As soon as tonight he says Twitter’s bird will be gone and the new logo will be an X.

Meanwhile on TikTok, he has a new account, or at least someone with access to new private looking videos has posted them using his name.

Less than 24 hours ago 12 new clips were posted simply under the name Elon Musk, with a profile link to the Wikipedia page for Elon Musk.

Likes, views and follows are exploding, as can be expected- and will likely be viral in a matter of hours, as happened with Billie Eilish, when she launched a private account.

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT8Rw6WUe/

The videos are almost all shot by a person, whose voice is sometimes heard, that appears to have close access to Musk. They tour Space X facilities, and even seem to go to various public events together.

There’s a voyeuristic quality to many of the clips, shot sometimes from backstage, following Elon as he strides into the spotlight- the footage is interesting if only for the mysterious nature of the source. Like a home made, amateur styled peek into the daily life of the world’s richest human being.

One clip of Elon testing a flame thrower is particularly eerie.

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT8Rw8Xxg/

@elonmusk__livechat 🚀 #Elonmusk #elonmusknews #elonmuskmotivation #elonmusktesla #elonmuskquotes #elonmuskisagenius #elonmusktweets #tesla #spacex #neuralink #theboringcompany #mars #nasa #business #failure #entrepreneur #entrepreneurlife #entrepreneurship #entrepreneurmindset ♬ original sound – Elon Musk

There appears to be a doubling of views, likes and follows every 12 hours or so, and this will likely accelerate. It will be interesting, indeed, to see what, if any, new videos are added and what they hold in the way of secret views and content.

The story gets weirder but continues to entertain

Elon Musk has not been immune to controversies throughout his career. One of the most notable controversies revolves around his use of social media. Musk’s tweets have often landed him in hot water, from making bold claims about Tesla’s stock prices to sharing controversial statements without considering the potential consequences.

Concerns have been raised about the work environment at Tesla’s factories. Reports of intense work pressure, employee safety issues, and high turnover have drawn attention to labor practices within the company.

Elon Musk’s outspoken nature and unorthodox behavior have also attracted controversy. His comments about certain socio-political issues and public figures have occasionally drawn criticism, leading some to question his judgment and use of social media.

Hilarious history or serious fun?

In 2002, Elon founded SpaceX, determined to make space exploration affordable and sustainable. Amid numerous setbacks, he persisted, and in 2008, SpaceX successfully launched its Falcon 1 rocket into orbit, marking a pivotal moment in his journey.

Around the same time, Elon became CEO and product architect of Tesla Motors, aiming to revolutionize the automotive industry with electric vehicles. Tesla faced challenges, but Elon’s vision of a sustainable future kept him pushing forward.

Climate Solutions, Sustainable Energy

This Climate Solution is a Sleeping Giant

A breakthrough technology evolution that can have an enormous, immediate impact

By Nick Mandala, for Positive Energy Action, republished by permission

Sometimes, the most effective and powerful solutions are right in front of us, yet somehow the potential is not immediately recognized.

This is a story about using available knowledge and technology to reduce climate warming GHG emissions to zero, while at the same time creating a new economic model for housing, transportation and, well, life on earth.

Two of the greatest challenges of our time (and one could argue, of all time) are climate change and the affordability crisis in housing worldwide.

Some data on housing, published by WeForum:

  • The housing crisis could impact 1.6 billion people by 2025, the World Bank says.
  • The world needs to build 96,000 new affordable homes every day to house the estimated 3 billion people who will need access to adequate housing by 2030, UN-Habitat says.

Superficially it would seem that these two challenges are in conflict; doesn’t it cost more to build zero carbon or even carbon negative homes? (negative carbon = produces more energy than it consumes)

What if a combination of existing methods, materials and technology could help solve both problems at once?

< R. Buckminster Fuller, (American architect, designer, inventor, and writer, best known for his geodesic domes) believed in the the ability of technological advancement to do “more and more with less and less until eventually you can do everything with nothing,” that is, an accelerating increase in the efficiency of achieving the same or more output (products, services, information, etc). >

”An accelerating increase in the efficiency of achieving the same or more output”

Before tackling the recipe for creating significantly more affordable housing, while at the same time battling climate change in a big way, it’s helpful to begin with an analogy from sustainable transport design.

Electric vehicles have been around, in primitive form, since the 1830s, nearly two decades before the oil industry officially began in the US.

But, in essence, it took 163 years before efficiency and battery technology were sufficiently developed to make transportation as cheap in an EV as in an ICE car.

( It can be argued that this accomplishment could have happened nearly a century sooner, if not for the threat it posed to the fossil fuel industry.)

The history of the ICE automobile is often one of ignoring efficiency until simply burning more fuel without limits became an issue. R. Buckminster Fuller (see above) designed a “Dymaxion” car in the early 1930s that could transport up to 11 passengers, reach speeds of up to 90 miles per hour, and ran 30 miles per gallon. The combined average mpg for cars and consumer trucks was sill less than 30 in 2011, nearly 80 years later.

The dawn of the EV era, finally

Tesla takes the efficiency of its vehicles very seriously and has made great strides in achieving long battery range and, with the model 3, increased affordability. The three main areas where EV efficiency can be increased are the materials (weight), the highly aerodynamic design (drag coefficient) and, of course, the battery design.

Aptera, a startup company that is targeting 2023 for initial mass production of its radically designed EV, is taking this focus on efficiency a step further in creating a solar powered car.

A great challenge to using solar panels on a passenger vehicle is the small surface-area that is available to mount the panels. For this reason every aspect of the design must be hyper-optimized.

Astoundingly, the Aptera is slated to release a model that can travel 1000 miles on a charge and, under ideal conditions, never need to be charged at all (100% self-charging via integrated solar panels).

Currently the biggest limitation is that the solar panels can only add 40 miles of range per day, meaning if you drive less than 40 miles per day on average you would never need to spend a cent plugging into grid power.

How do they do it? Special hyper-efficient PV panels, a drag coefficient nearly half of a Tesla Model 3 (1.3 vs. 2.3) and an aerodynamic design that makes it look as crazy as you can imagine. (Oh yea, and only 3 wheels)

If this story continues, and companies like Aptera are able to achieve additional incremental gains in efficiency to produce even better solar powered cars, transportation itself could become affordable at a level inconceivable in the current economic system.

Imagine buying a modestly priced vehicle (Aptera’s base model is currently priced at $25k) and never paying to charge it for the life of the car.

This is approaching an example of the “until eventually you can do everything with nothing” part of the quote above. Further gains are possible with continued design evolution.

What if a home, or housing community, could have “Aptera-like” performance?

Aptera formula:

  1. Solar powered
  2. Battery back up
  3. Hyper-efficient design to optimize 1+2

AM51 concept:

  1. Solar powered
  2. Battery back up (or geothermal, pumped hydro, etc + hyper-efficient heat pumps and other future tech appliances)
  3. Hyper-efficient design to optimize 1+2

At AM51 we are working to take decades of accumulated knowledge and use similar design principals, first pioneered by “Bucky” Fuller, in creating a complete “living system” for homes and communities.

The preconception that aerodynamic design and precision to create hyper-efficiencies is fine for cars, boats, aircraft, etc, but of little use in buildings / homes is where the communication challenge lies.

We use the term living system, because, like an EV, all the elements must be designed to work together with optimum performance in order to reach the twin goals of less than zero carbon emissions and achieving that at a price below current, traditionally built, homes and communities.

Also, a combination of the “core and shell” basically the equivalent of the body in a car, along with the power source (rooftop solar) each have to be hyper-efficient and work together at maximum performance.

Add to this eco-friendly insulation and HVAC systems, and something magical happens.

The EV design analogy is apt, also, because we incorporate batteries for backup and load management.

Where the analogy diverges is in the design of the building itself. Drag coefficient is less relevant (unless we create a flying house) but instead the thermal profile and material choices have a huge impact.

The thermal profile is the area where the greatest gains are possible. Traditional homes (and buildings generally) were never designed to take efficient energy use for climate control into account. (This would be the equivalent of driving a rectangular “block-car” EV -Hummer?- and watching your battery reserve disappear in minutes.)

Getting into the details of how exactly the thermal profile is achieved is beyond the scope of this article, however, what we can say is that the increased efficiency (compared to a home built with traditional methods) is achievable to between 80-94%.

In plain English, this is a measurement of how much less energy is needed to heat and cool the home, along with the standard average usage for typical residents (cooking, TVs, computers, etc).

Starting in the 70s, refined in the 90s, passive house standards are the underlying scientific foundation of our work in designing the ultimate thermal profile for homes.

This standard has been underappreciated and is often considered “expensive” which is only true if you look at only one aspect of the design in isolation (like triple pane windows, for example).

As part of a complete system, the real cost, not just in climate terms, is comparable, and, as discussed below, can be significantly less when every element is properly measured. Vastly less expensive and more efficient heat pumps or other new innovative HVAC systems already offset much of the added construction costs of superior materials and quantities.

Every home a power plant and a grid interactive citizen

Unlike an EV such as the Aptera, the roof area of an average sized home has space for a larger number of panels. Therefore, using standard current PV systems, an AM51 home, with an over 85% more efficient energy demand profile, can power itself using only a portion of the space available.

With a system that uses the entire available area, a significant amount of excess power is available to share with the public grid, in exchange for compensation.

All of this can be magnified, particularly in a community setting, once grid-interactive systems and net metering become standard, and laws adapt to maximize this potential.

In a nutshell, our goal is to create a system where a community functions as individual hyper-efficient homes, combined with shared solar power and backup.

The calculated benefits to this total system design are “beyond Aptera” in their potential impact at scale.

This comparison shows the real cost difference between a fully electric home built using traditional methods and an AM51 hyper-efficient home. The savings also reflect the higher energy costs for all-electric homes vs. cheap gas and oil. Many States are planning to require all electric single family home construction by 2023-2025.

Imagine a home that, once paid for via mortgage at a price at or below a traditional home, does not generate a cent in energy bills for up to 25 years…

…and, additionally, will generate monthly income, thus reducing the monthly payments, in some cases significantly.

All of this, while having a negative carbon footprint (more energy produced than consumed), and causing enormous reductions in GHG emissions at scale…

For many, utility bills are not the greatest concern or cost factor they focus on when imagining the cost of home ownership. But the potential – the freedom of a “grid-optional” lifestyle – and the incredible comfort, health and well-being attached to a perfectly climate controlled indoor environment – all this and many more benefits, once experienced, we believe will eventually make traditional home environments obsolete.

“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.”

-R. Buckminster Fuller

Adaptation to hotter heat waves and “polar vortexes”, and other unexpected weather events that are now increasingly likely, is an important topic.

Having a living system that can be counted on to keep you warm in winter, cool in the raging summer heat, and all for zero dollars beyond the basic initial costs, must become a minimum standard as we go forward.

Fractalize™, the coup de gras of affordability for the grid-interactive, hyper-efficient home

So much for battling climate change through efficient design and synergistic systems.

In order to reach even greater affordability, for most even more important and extremely meaningful in getting homes to those in need, AM51 homes and communities will need a construction method to reduce actual costs even further.

Labor shortages in construction and supply chain issues for materials, are two major factors that are driving costs up.

Our completely unique pre-manufactured building system, Fractalize™, takes on both issues and more.

With modern, yet simple, computer and robotic assisted manufacturing of building blocks, optimized specifically for home construction, and made exclusively out of plant-based materials (wood and other) far less labor is required.

Building times are up to 10X faster and minimal assembly crews, with no heavy machinery, are all that’s needed.

Again, the specific details of the hybrid-deep-tech-low-tech system are too complex for this article, but the end result of the added layer of efficiency (in this case efficient execution of construction) can result, by our calculations, in up to 15% lower construction costs overall, with additional cost-benefits from the speed to market.

The automated Fractalize™ manufacturing system is planned for mini factories near each region where homes and communities are needed.

It can also be adapted to make use of cost benefits in non-OECD developing economies where using local supply-chain logistics and available labor can lower prices much more for those unique circumstances.

As for North America, imagine owning a home and having your home pay you, provide free energy for a quarter century, yet cost up to 20% less than a comparable home, built old-style!

This, combined with unprecedented healthy, comfortable living, convenience, and elegance will proclaim a new architectural century. And with an Aptera in the driveway you’ll never pay a cent for transportation or utilities for the life of your home and car. Bucky would be winking at the thought…

Elon Musk, SpaceX, Tesla

Elon Musk’s Net Worth Journey: Now Down $200 Billion Since Peak

In January of 2021 Elon Musk became the second person to be publicly recognized as having a fortune of over $200 billion. The first person to get credit for this “feat”? Amazon’s Jeff Bezos. The all time high for Musk’s worth, as calculated by Bloomberg, was $340 billion, which was tallied at that absurd figure in November of 2021.

This amount coincided with the all time high for the stock of Tesla – which has since dropped its market cap by $880 billion while falling around 73% from the peak.

Again the $200 billion figure crosses Elon Musk’s path, this time on the downside, as he became the first person in history to lose $200 billion. Doing the simple math (which could be single dollars but in this case in in billions) in a bit over a year his fortunes changed to the tune of $340 billion > minus $200 billion leaving him with a “paltry” $137 billion to squeak by on.

Of course, this still leaves him with enough scratch to be the #2 richest person in the world after Bernard Arnault, the LVMH French luxury goods titan.

A little refresher on Elon Musk’s journey

As founder and CEO of SpaceX, Tesla, Neuralink, and The Boring Company, Elon Musk has made significant contributions to the development of electric vehicles, space exploration, and artificial intelligence. Musk has also been involved in other ventures such as PayPal and SolarCity.

In the early 2000s, Musk was primarily known for his role as CEO of PayPal, an online payment company that he co-founded in 1998. PayPal was acquired by eBay in 2002 for $1.5 billion, and Musk’s net worth at the time was estimated to be around $100 million.

After the sale of PayPal, Musk turned his attention to SpaceX, a company he founded in 2002 with the goal of reducing space transportation costs and enabling the colonization of Mars. In 2008, SpaceX became the first privately funded company to send a spacecraft to the International Space Station, and in 2012, it became the first private company to send and dock a spacecraft with the ISS. These milestones significantly increased the value of SpaceX and contributed to Musk’s growing net worth.

In the mid-2000s, Musk also became involved in the development of electric vehicles through his involvement with Tesla, a company he co-founded in 2003. Tesla’s first production vehicle, the Roadster, was released in 2008 and received widespread acclaim for its performance and range. In the years that followed, Tesla released several more electric vehicles, including the Model S, Model X, and Model 3, which have all been successful in the market.

Musk’s net worth experienced significant growth in the 2010s, particularly in the last few years. In 2020, Tesla’s stock price soared, and as a result, Musk’s net worth increased by over $100 billion. In 2021, his net worth reached over $200 billion, making him one of the wealthiest people in the world.

In addition to his work with SpaceX and Tesla, Musk has also been involved in other ventures, including Neuralink, a company that develops implantable brain-machine interfaces, and The Boring Company, which focuses on tunnel construction and transportation. These ventures have also contributed to Musk’s net worth.

If his recent purchase of Twitter and the attendant brouhaha played any role in the Tesla crash and his turn of fortunes is unclear. He denies that anything other than inflation is at fault.

Elon Musk’s net worth has fluctuated significantly over the years, but it has experienced significant growth in recent years, particularly in 2020 and 2021. His success is largely due to his involvement in companies such as SpaceX, Tesla, Neuralink, and The Boring Company, which have all had a significant impact on various industries.

Please help keep us publishing the content you love

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Breaking News, Elon Musk, Entertainment, Observation, Twitter

Greta Thunberg is Cool (Again) now According to Elon Musk

Elon takes sides (sort of) in epic tweet battle

Over the years there has been some measure of mutual admiration between Elon Musk and Greta Thunberg. More recently, however, Musk’s shift to the right has put them at odds, clearly.

Also, Greta has not hesitated to criticize the “Techno King” when she thought he was off-base regarding the climate and his actions and statements regarding his support for an accelerated transition to sustainable energy.

After Greta Thunberg’s tweet (and a monumental follow up) became one of the most popular tweets in history (278M views and 3.8M likes, as of this writing), it seems that fame was just too strong of an aphrodisiac for Elon Musk to resist.

Hence the return to her bandwagon:

Though both are climate positive, there have been disagreements

Elon Musk and Greta Thunberg have had a number of interactions in the media over the past few years. These interactions have ranged from supportive tweets and praise to public disagreements and criticism.

The tweet heard round the globe:

One of the first interactions between Musk and Thunberg occurred in 2019, when Musk tweeted his support for Thunberg’s efforts to raise awareness about climate change. In the tweet, Musk wrote: “Greta, you are a hero. Keep going. You are doing a great job.” Thunberg later responded to the tweet, thanking Musk for his support.

In 2020, Musk and Thunberg had a more public interaction when Thunberg criticized Musk’s plans to build a tunnel to alleviate traffic congestion in Los Angeles. Thunberg tweeted that the tunnel was “not the solution” to the problem of climate change and that “we must focus on the real solutions and not let ourselves be sidetracked by shiny distractions.”

Musk responded to the tweet, saying that the tunnel would “help with traffic & create jobs” and that “sustainability must be at the forefront of all decisions.”

Later that year, Thunberg criticized Musk again when he announced that Tesla would be selling carbon credits to other companies as a way to offset their carbon emissions. Thunberg tweeted that the sale of carbon credits was “not a solution” and that it was “a way for companies to avoid cutting their own emissions.”

Musk responded to the tweet, saying that the sale of carbon credits was “better than nothing” and that it was “a first step towards a greener future.”

In 2021, Musk and Thunberg had another public disagreement when Musk tweeted that “the last thing the world needs is a new type of gasoline” in response to Thunberg’s call for a ban on fossil fuels.

Thunberg responded to the tweet, saying that “the last thing the world needs is a Tesla owner who ignores the fact that burning fossil fuels is the main driver of the climate crisis and continues to spread misinformation about renewable energy.”

Despite these disagreements, Musk and Thunberg have also found common ground on some issues. For example, both have expressed support for renewable energy as a way to combat climate change. In 2019, Musk tweeted that “solar and storage are a critical part of the solution” to the climate crisis, and Thunberg has frequently called for a transition to renewable energy as a way to reduce carbon emissions.

Overall, the interactions between Musk and Thunberg in the media have been complex and varied. While they have had public disagreements on some issues, they have also found common ground on others and have expressed support for each other’s efforts to raise awareness about climate change.

Climate Solutions, Sustainable Energy

Virtual Power Plants Could be the Future of Distributed Energy

More grid power failures are likely: a distributed network is the only solution

If you have heard about the concept of a VPP, it is most likely that you read about a Tesla Virtual Power Plant. A virtual power plant (VPP) is a system that uses a network of decentralized energy resources, such as solar panels, wind turbines, and energy storage systems, to generate electricity.

These resources are connected and controlled through a central management system, which allows them to operate as a single, coordinated entity.

The goal of a VPP is to provide a reliable and cost-effective source of electricity by leveraging the collective output of the connected energy resources.

Tesla has been working on the concept going back as far as 2015, when they first began producing battery back up systems for solar.

Tesla’s home system, called Powerwall, and the Megapack, first offered in 2019, which is a massive 3 MWh energy storage product, are the best known backup systems for solar panel systems.

More recently companies such as Swell Energy are working together with utilities to operate a “behind the meter” virtual power plant systems that are able to manage residential solar installations to ensure that there are no outages and that the maximum financial benefit is available for the power generated.

VPPs can be used to provide electricity to a specific location, such as a neighborhood or a campus, or they can be connected to the grid and used to generate electricity for a larger area.

They can also be used to support the integration of renewable energy sources into the grid, by providing a flexible and responsive source of electricity that can be dispatched as needed to meet changing demand.

VPPs can be beneficial in a number of ways. They can help to reduce reliance on fossil fuels, which can help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate the impacts of climate change.

They can also help to lower energy costs by using locally-generated renewable energy, and they can help to improve the reliability of the electricity supply by providing a distributed source of electricity that is not reliant on a single power plant or transmission line.

The many benefits of these systems are only now beginning to emerge – with greater cooperation between the government, regulations, utilities and individual home owners the potential for a more resilient grid and more secure, sustainable energy for communities are virtually unlimited.

Please help keep us publishing the content you love

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Climate Solutions, Observation, Sustainable Energy

Solutions are Available to Save the Planet: How do we get the Public to Demand them?

Some of the most effective climate tech is proven and ready to roll

George Monbiot, columnist for The Guardian, released an article with the eye-catching title “Embrace what may be the most important green technology ever. It could save us all”. The article goes into some interesting detail regarding precision fermentation as a way to grow staple foods. He goes on to point out that, by switching from animal or even soy protein as our worldwide source, we could increase efficiency by a factor of 17,000 (Soy) of 138,000 (Beef).

And, he goes on, in the process this would reduce greenhouse gas emissions and water use by significant amounts. The detail is well presented and, if true, does add up to a world changing, planet saving formula, or at least a major step toward rescue.

The problem? In a nutshell this idea, even if rock solid in the data, would require the entire world to not only change the production methods for food (protein) but we would have to banish centuries of eating customs and traditions.

Ultimately if we are to be saved by this solution, it would only happen when no other food is available. Not a pleasant thought.

Reading between the lines the piece underscores a real and important issue, that finding a planet saving solution for global warming is one thing, finding a way to achieve mass adoption is another.

The Tesla Example

Tesla self driving sensors map photo: Tesla

EVs are the most obvious example of a technology, around since before the fossil fuel industry became dominant, that has finally reached a tipping point of eventual total adoption vs. internal combustion engine cars.

The transition, though perhaps inevitable, happend sooner, most would agree, because of Tesla and Elon Musk. And the difference was in the transformation of the concept and image from one of giving up pleasure for the good of the planet to “Have fun going 0 to 60 in 3.1 seconds while you save the planet”.

This formula, don’t sell the problem, sell the beauty, power and pleasure of the solution, is probably going to be the most important factor in deciding if the planet, and humanity, will survive.

Why make such a drastic claim? Because there are more solutions that are ready to be scaled up in a massive push worldwide, without any unproven or yet to be invented technology involved, if only the demand can be boosted with desire and excitement, not fear.

While precision fermentation might be too difficult to market at scale, there are other sectors ripe for positive disruption and change, that could save us all.

Unfortunately, not everything is as endorphin inducing as pounding the pedal to the metal in a Model S Plaid edition. Some things, like superior design, are only exciting when the results are felt over time.

The important thing is to make sure that attention is paid, not just to the climate benefits, but to the superior aesthetics and owner experience made possible by the new thing.

New built communities using hyper-efficient design and sustainable energy

Design technology that can reduce the energy required to heat and cool homes and buildings by up to 90% is available right now and proven. This method, combined with sustainable energy systems, including grid interactive generation and storage, could ultimately remove nearly 40% of worldwide emissions that can be traced back to to construction and buildings.

Not only would the new infrastructure in towns and cities eliminate greenhouse gas emissions but a host of other benefits for health, such as indoor air quality, would be automatically improved.

Further, climate adaptation, the ability to continue to live in maximum comfort even when the outdoor temperatures are at high or low extremes, would be built-in.

As if this is not enough, at scale, with some propagated construction and manufacturing intelligence added, the cost for all of this? Less than zero, in other words, the same or less than the current costs for obscenely inefficient “business as usual” homes and buildings.

So why is this not already a new standard, even mandatory?

For much the same reason it took more than a century for Tesla to come along and change the car industry. The challenge is to change the perception of the product. To build a focus on the beauty, power and excitement of a real life solution that does not trade fun and abundance for austerity and “do it because it’s right”.

There has to be so much momentum toward such an obviously superior concept that the public, the people that will live work and play in the structures, will demand nothing less.

This quote lays out one of the challenges, support and funding for efficiency, in a nutshell

“In our house we save 97% of the pumping energy by properly laying out some pipes. Well, if everyone in the world did that to their pipes and ducts, you would save about a fifth of the world’s electricity, or half the coal-fired electricity. And you get your money back instantly in new-build or in under a year typically in retrofits in buildings and industry. And yet, this sort of energy efficiency is not taught, and it’s certainly not in any government study or climate model. Why not? Because it’s not a technology. It’s a bloody design,”

Amory Lovins, cofounder (1982) and chairman emeritus of RMI, integrative designer of super-efficient buildings, factories, and vehicles

The challenges are layered but can be overcome

Tesla was subsidized, to the tune of $2.48 billion for ZEV credits alone, and more than $.3.2 billion in total from the State of California, but bear in mind that this is just one state, the total is far higher if all of the US is included.

The accomplishment, changing the perception of the EV and, ultimately, causing a worldwide shift toward sustainable transport to be accelerated, is no less remarkable, subsidies or not.

The point should be, that another mature design and technology, the hyper-efficient design system for homes and buildings as described above, needs both the genius marketing push and the financial support, both public and private that Tesla had.

It’s important to note, that Tesla did not invent the electric car. As a matter of fact, they were more than 100 years late to the party. Without Elon Musk as an early investor (with his own funds) the entire story might never have happened.

All of this just underscores the magnitude of the challenge. The perception of solutions like hyper-efficient building design as optional or unnecessary must be destroyed in favor of a focus on the excitement of a better built world and a more affordable magnificence and beauty, within reach now and will exist for all future generations.

If you are reading this and you get it – reach out, shout out, respond in every way you are able to help the world begin the march toward a positive change that is possible, and fun.

Please help keep us publishing the content you love

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Elon Musk, Tesla

Love or Hate Elon Musk, The Tesla Semi is a Big Step Forward

The December 1st launch date is good news for the climate

Elon Musk confirmed, via tweet, that a Tesla Semi successfully completed a 500 mile trip, fully loaded, on November 27th. With a full weight of 81,000 lbs, the 500 mile trip on a full charge is an impressive feat that bodes well for the production roll out, scheduled to begin on December 1st, 2022.

The date also coincides with scheduled delivery of the first production Semis to Pepsi. The timing is also interesting as Coca-Cola has recently begun its roll out of Renault trucks intended for last-mile deliveries in Belgium.

The Tesla Semi accomplishment is particularly impressive as the difficulty of designing a long-haul EV truck that is capable of 500 miles on a charge with a full load of cargo plus battery weight is off-the-charts difficult.

The 500 mile target is important since it corresponds to an 8 hour shift for drivers, after which a rest period would be mandatory. Not only is there an obvious climate benefit to fleets, and eventually the entire long haul industry, switching to EVs, the reduced costs per mile compared to diesel is significant.

Since an 80% charge is the recommended maximum for battery health and longevity, the Tesla Semi is expected to be able to run 400 miles (fully loaded) on a charge. The company has plans to provide solar-powered “Tesla Megacharger” charging stations that can reach 80% in 30 minutes.

Reducing the long haul diesel carbon footprint is a hugely important milestone

Diesel emissions are dirty if you try to breathe them, but they also emit 13% more CO2 compared to vehicles running on gasoline. As of 2020, transportation was responsible for 27% of GHG emissions, according to the US Environmental Protection Agency.

Although replacing the entire US fleet of both passenger vehicles and trucks with EVs, charged ideally by sustainable energy sources is a huge, long term undertaking, the mere possibility that it can be accomplished is proven by this first step into sustainable commercial transportation.

Considering the economic benefits, the opposite of a so-called “green premium” the adoption of EVs for the long haul trucking industry seems very likely to proceed rapidly. And, regardless of your take on Twitter’s recent drama, that’s good news for all of us.

Please help keep us publishing the content you love

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Elon Musk, SpaceX, Tesla, Twitter

Why Elon Musk Really Bought Twitter V2

Straight from a follower named “Spam Bot” the real reason…

Yesterday we published a story featuring a theory floated by a lady who, apparently, worked for Tesla for a decade, who believes that Elon is a “humanist” and wants to save the planet and needs Twitter to help him better communicate his ideas and solutions. No, not reinstating Trump, but she claimed it was all about global warming.

Not long after that article hit the airwaves, “Spam Bot”, reacted and posted a message (see photo below) where he (or she? or they?) outlined what’s really goin’ on:

Here’s the posted text in its entirety:

“Elon’s plan will soon be clear. Setting aside the fact the guy is an Alien (he literally admitted it) the ultimate plan is frightening. Twitter is key.

He needed to get rid of the engineers to rewrite the app.

After the re-engineering Twitter will be re-coded to subliminally force everyone to either buy a Tesla, Cybertruck or generate an uncontrollable urge to get into a Boring company pod.

Then, using the vast Starlink constellation a signal will be sent and all the Teslas, trucks and Boring pods will suddenly lock trapping the passengers inside.

The controls will freeze and they will autonomously head to the nearest Starbase launch site where flamethrower bearing a highly advanced version of the recently previewed ‘Musk clone robots will force NeuraLink implants deep into each persons cerebral cortex and then send them, like lame zombie sheep into waiting Starships for the journey to Mars.

Controlling everyone via NeuraLink, humanity will quickly devolve into a slave species, serving the Mars overlords for all of eternity. (Except for brunette Goth virgins. Virgins will be celebrated as honored guests and taken to a great feast within the Martian temple.

Afterwards they will be stripped naked, tied up and boiled alive to be consumed by the festive Martians).

Earth will be plundered for its remaining natural resources and die off becoming just another sphere of lifeless space rock eventually breaking apart into smaller and smaller pieces until turning to dust, scattering, and finally leaving the galaxy to drift into the abyss. It’s all so clear – you just need to put the pieces together.”

The actual comment left on Flipboard

Ok, let’s all take a short pause to, um….

If anyone is offended (or frightened ) by that, apologies on behalf of Lynxotic. As a writer it is important to always have something to say. This, text, this outpouring of strung together amalgamation of brand names and alien motivations has rendered this scribe… almost speechless…

To unpack this, in spite of being dumbfounded, the first thing that comes to mind is that “Spam Bot” gives Elon too much credit. Sure, he has admitted to being an alien, yes he is the wealthiest person on the planet, sure, his companies do all seem to fit together in a neat little puzzle that could enable exactly such a scenario…. But, no, it is not likely (hahaha) that this scenario is true, at least not all of it.

Actually, the idea that it was Elon’s intention all along to fire nearly all of Twitter and the mass exodus was what he wanted all along, does kind of make sense. If he really does want to rebuild it from the ground up, what better way to get rid of nearly all the employees than to find a clever (?) way to get everyone to quit (without looking really bad for firing everyone just before the holidays) .

And it will be quite entertaining to see how this plays out. For example, as we note in a new article coming today, Mastodon is growing fast and there’s an interesting possibility that a migration en mass over there could be a major upgrade.

Maybe that was Elon’s plan all along!

Elon Musk’s Real Reason for Buying Twitter is…

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Breaking News

Trump is Back on Twitter: Elon Musk Re-Instates Account

After a poll of internationals and bots the Twitter Clown is back

Ok, there should be a question mark on that heading – because it is as yet unclear if the former guy will actually resume tweeting. Since he has his own failing social media site, he has always maintained that he would not resume tweeting, even if reinstated.
melon Musk’s tweet which implies that the poll he launched earlier today is definitive – also added, in Latin no less: Vox Populi, Vox Dei : “the voice of the people is the voice of God”.

which is obvious nonsense – anyone in the world could vote and, naturally, millions of bots or other elements, elements that Musk himself claimed were running rampant – at a time when he needed an excuse to back out of the deal to buy Twitter.

As Trump himself has pointed out ad nauseam, he is good to boost “ratings” and traffic. Everyone loves a circus, and clowns.

https://twitter.com/astro_osk/status/1594140759606927362?s=46&t=7Lkh72LTFFoZ7bo-kFbo4g
Cruelty, pettiness and real estate: in Confidence Man, Maggie Haberman wields eye popping anecdotes to plumb the Trump phenomenon


Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Climate Solutions, Earth and Ecology, Observation

The Real Dream of Clean Energy: Video Eureka Moment from Cleo Abram

Video

Reducing fossil fuel use is important, but it’s more important to increase zero carbon energy production

Increasing sustainable energy production is possibly the most important goal for the world today. This idea is mostly couched, however, in negative terms, the idea that without a shift to clean, green sustainable sources climate change will destroy the future.

This is an important and essentially true statement.

However the automatic association of sustainable energy as being inevitably connected to less energy availability is a false premise. One that can be proven wrong with positive action towards building clean energy infrastructure, not as a defensive, desperate survival goal, but as a natural expansion of more energy and power that could lead to increased prosperity for the human race.

Deeply embedded thought patterns prevent us, perhaps, from imagining a world where more energy is not associated with more pollution, eventual depletion of a finite and limited resource and ultimately death, destruction and a CO2 induced climate catastrophe.

Optimism and abundance are linked with hope and a dream of a better standard of living for all. That dream is possible not with less energy use, but rather, more and cheaper energy availability that can be created by building a global, sustainable, renewable energy infrastructure.

A change in thought and perspective is necessary and could be more powerful than the sun

Utopia is a word that will get you laughed at, while oblivion is becoming the expected outcome of our century. Predicted by R. Buckminster Fuller in his book ‘Utopia or Oblivion‘, the choice we face in this century is not oblivion and catastrophic suffering or ‘business as usual’, it is not survival vs extinction, it is survival by unleashing utopian potential or total annihilation.

The paradox of sustainable energy is that, without it becoming the primary energy production system for the planet, combined with reduced consumption of fossil fuels until 100% sustainability is reached, oblivion or at least massive pain is assured; while at the same time, achieving 100% carbon free, clean energy from sustainable sources like solar, wind and geothermal, can create virtually unlimited increases in beneficial uses of energy, leading to an almost utopian potential for quality of life.

Thinking is the Difference Between Utopia or Oblivion

The clarity of realizing that clean sustainable energy ubiquity means unlimited energy consumption is non-destructive, and can end the malthusian nightmare of finite resources, that so many have fought over and even died for, is truly mind altering.

More is less, is another way to say it. Or at least more consumption and benefits, but none of the negative costs to the environment that we have come to see as inextricably linked to fossil fuel energy production and use.

At the same time it also harkens back to Elon Musk and Tesla’s mission statement. Tesla has had a vision for sustainable energy that is S3XY; more luxury, more beauty, more fun.

That mind-set, a mind set of abundant clean unlimited energy from sustainable sources, used to power beautiful powerful EVs, has made the company the enormous success that it is and ushered in an era EV production as job #1 throughout the entire auto industry.

The genius of this perspective centers on the idea that humans, when striving toward a positive goal, are always more powerful and successful than they are when simply trying to avoid a negative outcome.

Interestingly, the dream of reaching Mars, Musk’s other stated goal, is both positive and negative, since one reason for the urgent need to establish colonies there could be the destruction of earth due to climate disaster, caused by a failure to create a sustainable clean energy infrastructure in time.

It is the power and dream of much more abundant energy that can remove the idea from our minds that energy consumption is inherently bad, just because it does have negative ramifications galore when the source for that energy is dirty fossil fuels.

The Utopian Mindset must begin to permeate our consciousness if we are to overcome the challenges of 2000-2050 and beyond

Energy abundance is not the only type of abundance that our minds must learn to accept as possible for our species if we hope to turn things around. Bitcoin, for example, is currently being scapegoated in the media generally and is having endless disinformation hurled at its proof of work mining system based on the premise that it uses “too much” energy and too much of that energy is sourced from fossil fuels at this time.

But why not focus on the real problem? Why not see that a monumental and heroic effort to rid the world of dependence on “bad” and ultimately finite and limited sources of energy from fossil fuels and shift, ultimately, 100% of production to clean and renewable sources, needs to be job #1 for team earth?

Again, in an all-or-nothing scenario there is no option to equivocate. The negative reasons that fossil fuels must be phased out as soon as possible (‘the stick’ as per Cleo Abram in her video below) become more inevitable each minute and are already threatening everything humans have accomplished to date.

The positive motivation is less obvious for most at this point (‘the carrot’) and yet is ultimately more powerful (S3XY!) since it carries with it the hope that we can not only avert disaster, death and destruction, but can build a clean, abundant and infinitely expandable energy supply that could be used to build the first tentative steps toward a utopian dream.

Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Crypto, Elon Musk, Twitter

Bitcoin’s Origins get Well-timed Mention in Elon Musk Tweet

The ‘why’ of Bitcoin is back in the news

Bitcoin’s history and origination is an important factor for more than just true believers and maximalists. Created in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, and with evidence that it was intended, by its founder, known only as Satoshi Nakamoto, as remedy for the failed system that had nearly collapsed the world economic system at that time.

In a recent CoinDesk post, Nathan Thompson wrote: Bitcoin’s genesis block is historic, not just because it contained the first 50 bitcoins, but because it had a message coded in the hash code: “The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks.”

The bank bailouts and various financial system failures were integral, then, in the creation and purpose of bitcoin, and one could even say, coins and systems that followed, starting with Ethereum in 2015.

After a few weeks of tweets revolving around the Twitter buyout brouhaha, Elon Musk, in a reply, added, in a more introspective tone than has been seen of late, some of his thoughts on the subject;

Interesting timing and a nice shift from the obsession with prices

The recent “crash” and panicked voices over the drop of the bitcoin price below $30k is the unspoken background addressed in this exchange, it appears.

Decrying the erroneous belief that “prices only go up” held by the public at large during the doomed run up to the 2008-2009 crisis could be seen as a hint that, perhaps, prices of assets like Bitcoin, and Tesla shares, for that matter, can not “only go up” and anyone who seeks such a preposterous nirvana is digging their own graves, having failed to learn from all the times in history that fools took the path of peak greed and self-delusion.

Worse, and worth being singled out specifically, are those that profited from the delusion of others in “predatory lending” practices, which Elon Musk “doesn’t support”.

Ultimately for this tweet thread, it was Elon Musk’s Twitter buddy @BillyM2k that nailed it with a series of tweets explicitly spelling out the divergence between the founders and believers in the original, positive, intent of bitcoin and the massive bubble of speculators and scammers that has, in his view unfortunately, grown up around it.

The Best Books on Cryptocurrency

Pointing out that DogeCoin, as an example, was created to highlight the stupidity of speculation and excess greed that came with the avalanche of meme-coins and “shitcoins” etc, that flooded the market and, to a great degree, obscured the original, positive force that bitcoin and decentralized finance was invented to be.

https://twitter.com/BillyM2k/status/1525274042592202752?s=20&t=yenGWhR_EZDBYDoUwOhnZg

Maybe, some of the various challenges and stumbles that Elon Musk is experiencing lately, seemingly for the first time, after a string of incredible triumphs, culminating with the Person of the Year designation and the buyout launch that is now in limbo, will inspire him to be more reflective and use his powerful position as a “Twitter-sage” to draw more attention to the need for a voice of “reason”, rather than as a cheerleader for the bonfires of vanity and speculation.

https://twitter.com/BillyM2k/status/1525277905319628801?s=20&t=yenGWhR_EZDBYDoUwOhnZg

Related:

Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Business, Sustainable Energy

How Electric Trucking Options are Coming to Freight Businesses 

There’s been a lot of talk lately about transitioning to sustainable energy sources, and for good reason. With the threat of climate change looming, it’s more important than ever that we work to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels.

Transportation options that are more sustainable than gas-powered vehicles and also much cheaper are out there. Believe it or not, sustainable energy transport is not only possible; it’s becoming increasingly popular as companies and consumers alike move towards greener options.

In this post, we’ll explore how transport companies can transition to sustainable energy transportation. We’ll also look at some of the challenges and benefits associated with making this switch. So if you’re interested in learning more about sustainable energy transportation the information below may be useful.

What Is Sustainable Energy Transportation and Why Is It Important?

At its core, sustainable energy transportation refers to any form of transport that relies on renewable energy sources or non-polluting fuels. Sustainable energy sources include electric or solar power plus things like wind farms and biofuels.

Many freight companies are looking into sustainable energy transportation because it helps reduce greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution. In fact, the transportation sector is responsible for a significant portion of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States—nearly 30 percent, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Furthermore, changing regulations and consumer preferences may significantly impact the future of sustainable energy transportation. For example, many cities are now starting to implement strict emissions standards for taxis and buses, which could result in more companies shifting towards electric or hybrid vehicles.

For transportation businesses to remain competitive in the future, it’s important to start exploring sustainable energy transportation options now. Not only will this help reduce their impact on the environment, but it will also help them stay ahead of the curve.

Challenges of Transitioning to Sustainable Energy Transportation

Of course, making the switch to sustainable energy transportation isn’t without its challenges. Perhaps one of the biggest obstacles for transport companies is investing in the new technologies and infrastructure required for these types of vehicles. For example, electric vehicles need charging stations, and solar-powered vehicles may need special equipment to harness the sun’s energy.

Another challenge that transport companies face is changing consumer behavior. While there is a growing interest in sustainable energy transportation options, many consumers are still unfamiliar with these technologies or are hesitant to switch from traditional methods like gas-powered vehicles.

This means that transport companies need to find ways to educate consumers about the benefits of sustainable energy transportation and convince them to make the switch. This can be a costly and challenging process, but it’s essential if we want to see widespread adoption of these technologies.

The final challenge to consider when transitioning to sustainable energy transportation is the availability of resources. Currently, sustainable energy sources like solar and wind power are still not as widely available as fossil fuels. This means that transport companies need to be strategic about where they source their energy and how they use it.

However, despite these challenges, more and more transport companies are making the switch to sustainable energy transportation. And as more businesses and consumers become educated about the benefits of this technology, we’ll likely see even broader implementation in the future.

Benefits of Transitioning to Sustainable Energy Transportation

Despite the challenges that come with transitioning to sustainable energy transportation, there are also a number of benefits that make the change worth it.

For one thing, sustainable energy sources like wind and solar power are becoming much cheaper than traditional fossil fuels. Using sustainable energy can help companies save money on fuel costs, as renewable energy is more affordable, in aggregate, compared to conventional fossil fuels.

As an example, at Cross Country Car Shipping detailed examples are shown breaking down the cost of shipping vehicles across the country. In the future, this cost could be greatly reduced as more transport companies start using sustainable energy.

Additionally, sustainable energy transportation options are becoming increasingly available as more companies invest in this area. This means that transport companies have more choices when it comes to finding vehicles and technologies to meet their needs. Plus, these types of vehicles produce fewer emissions, which can help improve air quality and reduce health problems like asthma.

The benefits of transitioning to sustainable energy transportation are clear. And not only will they help transport companies save money and reduce their environmental impact, but they’ll also help these businesses remain competitive in an ever-changing marketplace.

How Can Transport Companies Make the Switch to Sustainable Energy Sources?

Making the switch to sustainable energy transportation can be challenging, but it’s essential work that must be done if we want to see a more sustainable future for transportation. 

There are many ways transportation and shipping companies can transition to sustainable energy sources. Some possible strategies include investing in electric or hybrid vehicles, using solar power, and utilizing renewable fuels like biofuels. Additionally, companies may need to make changes to their infrastructure and educate consumers about the benefits of sustainable energy transportation to facilitate this transition. 

Transitioning to sustainable energy transportation is an important step many companies are taking to be more environmentally friendly and cost-effective. And while the challenges involved in this process should not be underestimated, the potential benefits make the switch well worth it.

The Takeaway on Transport and Sustainable Energy

As the world looks for ways to become more environmentally friendly, many transport and shipping companies are making the switch to sustainable energy transportation. This transition can be challenging, but it comes with many benefits that can help businesses save money. It’s also an important step in protecting our planet for future generations.

There are a few key things that companies need to think about when it comes to making the switch to sustainable energy, including harnessing the right technologies and communicating the benefits of this transition to consumers. And with some forethought and planning, companies can make the switch successfully while helping to protect our planet for years to come.​

 Related:

Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Elon Musk, Twitter

Elon Musk’s Latest Tweet Says it All, or Does it?

Perhaps in a moment of incoherence, this three-tweet set was launched. It is just plain goofy (unless he is buttering up “the right” for after mid-terms…?)

In what looks like some kind of twisted attempt at being diplomatic, Elon Musk’s latest tweet manages to clarify his stance regarding “free-speech“ about as much as a mud bath clarifies a cupcake.

Leading off with a bizarre attack on what he Calls “the far left “, he explains that it is his contention that they “hate everyone including themselves”.

Standing alone this is already a bizarre statement, which seems like a far right talking point, typical of the Joe Rogan school of anti-cancel culture and anti-so-called “woke-mob”.

He follows this up with a disclaimer of sorts, as bland as it can be stating that he is “no fan” of the far right, either.

One would have to be forgiven if they thought that this implied, in its very wording, an actual bias toward the far right which is what many already believe.

Ending his three-tweet soufflé on the flat “Let’s have less hate and more love” the responses, not surprisingly, were a very loving mix of WTF and ????

To be fair, there were also lots like this:

And this:

But, the way his tweets were so oddly posted, there was definitely a sense among “lefties” that he was biased. And it didn’t take a genius, but merely @cjwalker21, to retort:

It actually seems odd, that Elon Musk would wade (or dive head first) into a “left vs. right” argument that has no hope of any kind of resolution. And pretending that the disagreements are equal on some level and love can just be ratcheted up as if it was cheap rocket fuel, seems odd…

Then, in what’s gotta qualify as “far left’ in Elon’s book, this gem:

https://twitter.com/Grizzy_333/status/1520210804330704897?s=20&t=4N4AdzxcqVPa3BiO9XkCjg

Honestly, if you just look at the numbers, maybe you don’t see taxes as the answer, but considering the company Elon is in (Zuckerberg and Bezos?) there’s clearly something wrong with this picture?

Related:

Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Climate Solutions, News, Observation, Politics, Tech

‘Declaration for the Future of the Internet’ Launched to Promote Open Web for All

The United States, the European Union, and dozens of other countries on Thursday launched a global Declaration for the Future of the Internet vowing online protection of human rights, respect for net neutrality, and no government-imposed shutdowns that was applauded by progressive advocates for a more open and democratic web.

“If acted upon,” the declaration “would ensure that people everywhere can connect, communicate, organize, and create new and amazing things that will benefit the entire world—not entrench the power of unaccountable billionaires and oligarchs.”

“Today, for the first time, like-minded countries from all over the world are setting out a shared vision for the future of the internet, to make sure that the values we hold true offline are also protected online, to make the internet a safe place and trusted space for everyone, and to ensure that the internet serves our individual freedom,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in a statement.

“Because the future of the internet,” she said, “is also the future of democracy, of humankind.”

The unveiling of the three-page document came months after President Joe Biden’s Summit for Democracy at which his administration was reportedly mulling the launch of an Alliance for the Future of the internet. It also comes amid swelling scrutiny over the power of big tech corporations and continued attacks to online access imposed by authoritarian regimes.

The nonbinding declaration references a rise in “the spread of disinformation and cybercrimes,” user privacy concerns as vast troves of personal data is collected online, and platforms that “have enabled an increase in the spread of illegal or harmful content.”

It further promotes the internet operating “as a single, decentralized network of networks—with global reach and governed through the multistakeholder approach, whereby governments and relevant authorities partner with academics, civil society, the private sector, technical community and others.”

Signed by over 55 nations—including all the E.U. member states, the U.K, and Ukraine—the document states in part:

We affirm our commitment to promote and sustain an internet that: is open, free, global, interoperable, reliable, and secure and to ensure that the internet reinforces democratic principles and human rights and fundamental freedoms; offers opportunities for collaborative research and commerce; is developed, governed, and deployed in an inclusive way so that unserved and underserved communities, particularly those coming online for the first time, can navigate it safely and with personal data privacy and protections in place; and is governed by multistakeholder processes. In short, an internet that can deliver on the promise of connecting humankind and helping societies and democracies to thrive.

The declaration won plaudits from U.S.-based digital rights group Free Press, whose co-CEO Craig Aaron said it “points to a vision of the internet that puts people first” and that, “if acted upon… would ensure that people everywhere can connect, communicate, organize, and create new and amazing things that will benefit the entire world—not entrench the power of unaccountable billionaires and oligarchs.”

“We’re encouraged by the declaration’s strong statements of support for net neutrality, affordable and inclusive internet access, and data-privacy protections, and its decisive stance against the spread of hate and disinformation,” he added.

Aaron called on the U.S. to “take the necessary steps to live up to these ideals—protecting the free flow of information online, safeguarding our privacy, ending unlawful surveillance, and making broadband affordable and available to everyone.”

The Center for Democracy & Technology also welcomed the declaration, describing it in a Twitter thread as “an important commitment by nations around the world to uphold human rights online and off, advance democratic ideals, and promote an open Internet.”

While it “hit on the right priorities” including protection of personal data privacy and a commitment to a multistakeholder internet governance process, the group called on each signatory to “review their own laws and policies against admirable standards articulated in the Declaration.”

“For the Declaration to have any persuasive power,” said the group, “the U.S. and other nations need to get their own houses in order.”

Jennifer Brody, U.S. advocacy manager at Access Now, also greeted the document with a tepid welcome.

“Of course we support calls in the declaration, like refraining from shutting down the internet and reinvigorating an inclusive approach to internet governance, but we have seen so many global principles and statements come and go without meaningful progress,” she said. “The burden is on the Biden administration and allies to do more than talk the talk.”

Originally published on Common Dreams and republished under a Creative Commons license (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

Related Articles:

Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Elon Musk, Twitter

Everybody either Hates or Loves that Elon Musk bought Twitter: Everybody’s Wrong

Even for Twitter the reaction is bizarre to the extreme

Wow. The big news came, simple and straightforward, on Monday afternoon. Eastern time. From the official press release: “Twitter, Inc. (NYSE: TWTR) today announced that it has entered into a definitive agreement to be acquired by an entity wholly owned by Elon Musk, for $54.20 per share in cash in a transaction”

What came next was a tsunami of extreme emotions – mostly negative by casual observation. The happiest seemed to be MAGA dreamers that somehow think that Elon Musk will be all about enabling Trump and his minions to get back into social media shenanigans, a.k.a. “free speech’. Which is, to put it mildly, doubtful.

To get the color of this intense reaction here are just a few example headlines:

Oddly, the most ferocious detractors of this deal are the “left” and those that are also believing the nonsense that somehow this is a big win for the right and for Trump (huh?) and therefore – the friend of my enemy is my enemy, or some such thing.

‘A Real Threat to Democracy’

We All Know Elon Musk Is Buying Twitter To Help Him Get Away With Stock Fraud, Right?

“Why the oligarch Elon Musk is a threat to independent media’

and so on

Then the oddly stilted semi-jubilation from the right:

https://twitter.com/crimsonjester/status/1518787555835056129?s=20&t=LX-W1cn7nl8vtM6CQdzixg

Naturally, Trump says he would not tweet again even if invited since he has his own useless and failed app. This is the basic problem of 90% of the reactions – the more extreme they are the more ridiculous the assumptions as to what Elon Musk will actually do.

Bots, often controlled by foreign actors, were the issue in 2020, not the tweets by actual people

If you were on twitter in 2020 during the run-up to the election, or in 2016 for that matter, the biggest issue was not the real tweets from Trump and others of his ilk, no matter how stupid and deranged those tweets were.

It was, instead, the thousands of fake accounts amplifying the “message” and creating a wall of lies and disinformation. Those bots would attack any anti-Trump or Pro-Biden (or Pro-Hillary) tweets and applaud all pro-Trump messages with likes, re-tweets etc. And they still exist to today.

They were ridiculously obvious as fake, for anyone who bothered to check, but the massive number and the fact they they were allowed to run-rampant made this stupid, primitive method of perverting actual free speech and behavior bizarrely successful.

This is just one small point. The idea that Elon Musk bought Twitter so that he can re-instate Trump and his bot-army goes against literally everything that is known about him as well as what he has actually said.

Of course anyone can say that Musk is not sincere, etc. But stating unequivocally that he will defeat the bots is a step in the right direction. Bots and fake accounts are epidemic in all social media and are likely tolerated for nefarious reasons – the least negative of which would be that it’s too expensive to care.

The fact that he would make mention of the “shadow ban council” also shows an awareness of the problems associated with algorithms that have agendas that punish and shadow ban at the whim of those in charge as being important- < it is > – that’s a huge plus, at least in terms of transparency or dialog about actual problems that exist.

And let’s not forget that Elon Musk is not beholden to a specific political party (everyone accuses him of being on the other side or of being a libertarian, and that maybe a good fit for some of his expressed views, but he has not specifically aligned himself with a particular party).

What this all boils down to – as alluded to in the title, is that there’s a strong sense that nearly all these opinions and much of the outrage is dead wrong about what will actually happen.

Can Elon Musk ‘Fix’ Twitter?

It would be equally insane, however, to assume that anyone, even the world’s richest person, can just buy Twitter, or any other huge tech platform (Web2 platform) and then fix all the problems.

Can anyone even agree on what Twitter is or what it should be? And so many of the problems that twitter has are baked-in to the whole huge-Web2-platform-defacto-monopoly thing that makes life online so frustrating and, at times, hopeless.

But what a private company, run by a “brash” gazillionaire is, at least, is something different. Well, sort of. That’s where it comes down to a probably crazy experiment in just how much worse can it get… Zuckerberg, Bezos, the Google Twins? Tough acts to follow?

Some have pointed out that Elon Musk will have even more power and control over Twitter than, for example, Zuckerberg has over FaceBook-er-Meta. And that is, for some, a scary and infuriating concept. On the other hand, what if more control, in the hands of someone who at least appears to have a sincere desire to see Twitter succeed as a “Town Square” and communication tool for humanity is actually what it takes to get things on the road to betterville…?

It’s hard to give a guy with $350 billion the benefit of the doubt, I get it

In other words, instead of seeing Twitter as a battleground between left and right, where one or the other should “win”, there is at least the possibility that Elon Musk sees it as much more than that.

That he sees it a bit closer to what it was created to be – a tool for people to communicate is a novel way.

Call it micro-blogging or shit-posting or memeifycation of life or what you will, the idea is, that if it were possible to create a tool that did indeed allow and even encourage actual online free speech is one that could at least be an experiment worth trying.

Is ‘this guy’ the right person to do it? Maybe not. Is a public company, with the explicit primary goal of enriching shareholders a better way? Not so far in any known example.

In fact this seems to be the ‘secret’ that is hiding in plain sight, that an altruistic goal by a super-rich private individual who decides to take over a social media company, to try to do something never done before – might actually be exactly what it takes to begin a new way for people to communicate online.

And, regardless of how skeptical we may be of that idea, the fact is that extreme change is urgently needed – leads to the reality that anything new and different should at least be tolerated and tried before it is condemned and attacked.

Related:

Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Elon Musk, Twitter

Elon Musk owns Twitter after $44 Billion: What’s Next?

Video

Freedom of Speech is declared driving force for Takeover

Twitter Inc. announced that it has agreed to be acquired by an entity that is wholly owned by Elon Musk. The news comes after it was widely leaked that negotiations were underway over the weekend and that a deal was imminent.

Going forward the company will be privately held and current stockholders will be compensated at $54.20 for each share of common stock that they own as of completion of the deal. This represents a 38% premium over the closing price on April 1st when Musk’s 9% stake was announced.

The board voted unanimously to the proposal and, though subject to the approval of Twitter’s shareholders, and applicable regulatory approvals the agreement is expected to go through in 2022.

What will follow is unknown, but speculation is rampant

Since the announcement on April 1st that Elon Musk had purchased approximately 9% of Twitter and this Saga began, there has been a busier than usual frenzy of speculation regarding the possibility that has now come to pass.

On the most superficial level, there was an odd kind of measured jubilation on the political Right, with speculation that Musk might re-instate Trump and others who have been permanently banned (although Trump himself indicated that he would decline if invited back) and a sense of horror on the Left – with an implied mistrust of the world’s richest human, connecting this situation to ongoing debates over wealth taxes and economic inequality overall.

On a deeper track are those closer to the situation – such as Jack Dorsey, who expressed support and openly criticized the current board and public structure in elucidating tweets, such as the one below.

Looking back at some of the harmony and love shared over bitcoin and other major topics an alliance, or at least a consulting status for @Jack could be amazing in terms of what could come of this – a private Twitter with Musk at the helm, in terms of a new direction for social media and all online business and how they evolve going forward.

While it may seem presumptuous to think it won’t be a disaster, there are deeper issues that would indicate that a lot more thought might have gone into this than a superficial look reveals.

Elon Musk has proved, and explained to anyone that will listen, that his motives and goals for any business endeavor are in a new category of entrepreneur, and his success, often against incredible odds, are a testament to the power of this mindset.

With Tesla, he took on nothing less than the most powerful, entrenched (and arguably corrupt) special interest group in history, the fossil fuel industry, and somehow, due perhaps as much to timing as to any particular strategy or plan, prevailed.

That this takeover could mark the beginning of real change in “Web2” and social media, regarding of the risk of a private individual excepting near absolute control, it is a welcome change, based on the reality that the status quo, at Twitter and basically all the so-called internet giants could not be any worse.

Let’s hope that the public and very visible lead up to this deal will be followed in the near future by a continuation of that openness and that changes and plans will be announced as they happen, which would be entertaining at the least, and exhilarating at best.

There’s a lot more to unpack in this, not just in the reactions and opinions that will surely flood now that the next step is upon us. but in a fruitful and valuable deeper look into the real motivations and potential of this new deal.

For that, please stay tuned, and for now, please let me know what you think about Twitter’s decision and new owner.

Related:

Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Earth Day, Sustainable Energy

A ‘100% renewables’ target might not mean what you think it means. An energy expert explains

In the global effort to transition from fossil fuels to clean energy, achieving a “100% renewables” electricity system is considered ideal.

Some Australian states have committed to 100% renewable energy targets, or even 200% renewable energy targets. But this doesn’t mean their electricity is, or will be, emissions free.

Electricity is responsible for a third of Australia’s emissions, and making it cleaner is a key way to reduce emissions in other sectors that rely on it, such as transport.

So it’s important we have clarity about where our electricity comes from, and how emissions-intensive it is. Let’s look at what 100% renewables actually implies in detail.

Is 100% renewables realistic?

Achieving 100% renewables is one way of eliminating emissions from the electricity sector.

It’s commonly interpreted to mean all electricity must be generated from renewable sources. These sources usually include solar, wind, hydro, and geothermal, and exclude nuclear energy and fossil fuels with carbon capture and storage.

But this is a very difficult feat for individual states and territories to try to achieve.

The term “net 100% renewables” more accurately describes what some jurisdictions — such as South Australia and the ACT — are targeting, whether or not they’ve explicitly said so.

These targets don’t require that all electricity people use within the jurisdiction come from renewable sources. Some might come from coal or gas-fired generation, but the government offsets this amount by making or buying an equivalent amount of renewable electricity.

A net 100% renewables target allows a state to spruik its green credentials without needing to worry about the reliability implications of being totally self-reliant on renewable power.

So how does ‘net’ 100% renewables work?

All east coast states are connected to the National Electricity Market (NEM) — a system that allows electricity to be generated, used and shared across borders. This means individual states can achieve “net 100% renewables” without the renewable generation needing to occur when or where the electricity is required.

Take the ACT, for example, which has used net 100% renewable electricity since October 2019.

The ACT government buys renewable energy from generators outside the territory, which is then mostly used in other states, such as Victoria and South Australia. Meanwhile, people living in ACT rely on power from NSW that’s not emissions-free, because it largely comes from coal-fired power stations.

This way, the ACT government can claim net 100% renewables because it’s offsetting the non-renewable energy its residents use with the clean energy it’s paid for elsewhere.

SA’s target is to reach net 100% renewables by the 2030s. Unlike the ACT, it plans to generate renewable electricity locally, equal to 100% of its annual demand.

At times, such as especially sunny days, some of that electricity will be exported to other states. At other times, such as when the wind drops off, SA may need to rely on electricity imports from other states, which probably won’t come from all-renewable sources.

So what happens if all states commit to net 100% renewable energy targets? Then, the National Electricity Market will have a de-facto 100% renewable energy target — no “net”.

That’s because the market is one entire system, so its only options are “100% renewables” (implying zero emissions), or “less than 100% renewables”. The “net” factor doesn’t come into it, because there’s no other part of the grid for it to buy from or sell to.

How do you get to “200% renewables”, or more?

It’s mathematically impossible for more than 100% of the electricity used in the NEM to come from renewable sources: 100% is the limit.

Any target of more than 100% renewables is a different calculation. The target is no longer a measure of renewable generation versus all generation, but renewable generation versus today’s demand.

Australia could generate several times more renewable energy than there is demand today, but still use a small and declining amount of fossil fuels during rare weather events. Shutterstock

Tasmania, for example, has legislated a target of 200% renewable energy by 2040. This means it wants to produce twice as much renewable electricity as it consumes today.

But this doesn’t necessarily imply all electricity consumed in Tasmania will be renewable. For example, it may continue to import some non-renewable power from Victoria at times, such as during droughts when Tasmania’s hydro dams are constrained. It may even need to burn a small amount of gas as a backup.

This means the 200% renewable energy target is really a “net 200% renewables” target.

Meanwhile, the Greens are campaigning for 700% renewables. This, too, is based on today’s electricity demand.

In the future, demand could be much higher due to electrifying our transport, switching appliances from gas to electricity, and potentially exporting energy-intensive, renewable commodities such as green hydrogen or ammonia.

Targeting net-zero emissions

These “more than 100% renewables” targets set by individual jurisdictions don’t necessarily imply all electricity Australians use will be emissions free.

It’s possible — and potentially more economical — that we would meet almost all of this additional future demand with renewable energy, but keep some gas or diesel capacity as a low-cost backstop.

This would ensure continued electricity supply during rare, sustained periods of low wind, low sun, and high demand, such as during a cloudy, windless week in winter.

The energy transition is harder near the end — each percentage point between 90% and 100% renewables is more expensive to achieve than the previous.

That’s why, in a recent report from the Grattan Institute, we recommended governments pursue net-zero emissions in the electricity sector first, rather than setting 100% renewables targets today.

For example, buying carbon credits to offset the small amount of emissions produced in a 90% renewable NEM is likely to be cheaper in the medium term than building enough energy storage — such as batteries or pumped hydro dams — to backup wind and solar at all times.

The bottom line is governments and companies must say what they mean and mean what they say when announcing targets. It’s the responsibility of media and pundits to take care when interpreting them.

This article is by James Ha, Associate, Grattan Institute and republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Related:

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Climate Solutions, News, Observation

How fast can we stop Earth from warming?

The ocean retains heat for much longer than land does. photo / adobe stock / lynxotic

Richard B. (Ricky) Rood, University of Michigan

Global warming doesn’t stop on a dime. If people everywhere stopped burning fossil fuels tomorrow, stored heat would still continue to warm the atmosphere.

Picture how a radiator heats a home. Water is heated by a boiler, and the hot water circulates through pipes and radiators in the house. The radiators warm up and heat the air in the room. Even after the boiler is turned off, the already heated water is still circulating through the system, heating the house. The radiators are, in fact, cooling down, but their stored heat is still warming the air in the room.

This is known as committed warming. Earth similarly has ways of storing and releasing heat.

Emerging research is refining scientists’ understanding of how Earth’s committed warming will affect the climate. Where we once thought it would take 40 years or longer for global surface air temperature to peak once humans stopped heating up the planet, research now suggests temperature could peak in closer to 10 years.

But that doesn’t mean the planet returns to its preindustrial climate or that we avoid disruptive effects such as sea level rise.

I am a professor of climate science, and my research and teaching focus on the usability of climate knowledge by practitioners such as urban planners, public health professionals and policymakers. Let’s take a look at the bigger picture.

How understanding of peak warming has changed

Historically, the first climate models represented only the atmosphere and were greatly simplified. Over the years, scientists added oceans, land, ice sheets, chemistry and biology.

Today’s models can more explicitly represent the behavior of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide. That allows scientists to better separate heating due to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere from the role of heat stored in the ocean. https://www.youtube.com/embed/_WUNMzC98jI?wmode=transparent&start=0 Why global warming is ocean warming.

Thinking about our radiator analogy, increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in Earth’s atmosphere keep the boiler on – holding energy near the surface and raising the temperature. Heat accumulates and is stored, mostly in the oceans, which take on the role of the radiators. The heat is distributed around the world through weather and oceanic currents.

The current understanding is that if all of the additional heating to the planet caused by humans was eliminated, a plausible outcome is that Earth would reach a global surface air temperature peak in closer to 10 years than 40. The previous estimate of 40 or more years has been widely used over the years, including by me.

It is important to note that this is only the peak, when the temperature starts to stabilize – not the onset of rapid cooling or a reversal of climate change.

I believe there is enough uncertainty to justify caution about exaggerating the significance of the new research’s results. The authors applied the concept of peak warming to global surface air temperature. Global surface air temperature is, metaphorically, the temperature in the “room,” and is not the best measure of climate change. The concept of instantly cutting off human-caused heating is also idealized and entirely unrealistic – doing that would involve much more than just ending fossil fuel use, including widespread changes to agriculture – and it only helps illustrate how parts of the climate might behave.

Even if the air temperature were to peak and stabilize, “committed ice melting,” “committed sea level rise” and numerous other land and biological trends would continue to evolve from the accumulated heat. Some of these could, in fact, cause a release of carbon dioxide and methane, especially from the Arctic and other high-latitude reservoirs that are currently frozen.

For these reasons and others, it is important to consider the how far into the future studies like this one look.

Oceans in the future

Oceans will continue to store heat and exchange it with the atmosphere. Even if emissions stopped, the excess heat that has been accumulating in the ocean since preindustrial times would influence the climate for another 100 years or more.

Because the ocean is dynamic, it has currents, and it will not simply diffuse its excess heat back into the atmosphere. There will be ups and downs as the temperature adjusts.

The oceans also influence the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, because carbon dioxide is both absorbed and emitted by the oceans. Paleoclimate studies show large changes in carbon dioxide and temperature in the past, with the oceans playing an important role.

The chart shows how excess heat – thermal energy – has built up in ocean, land, ice and atmosphere since 1960 and moved to greater ocean depths with time. TOA CERES refers to the top of the atmosphere. Karina von Schuckman, LiJing Cheng, Matthew D. Palmer, James Hansen, Caterina Tassone, et al., CC BY-SA

Countries aren’t close to ending fossil fuel use

The possibility that a policy intervention might have measurable impacts in 10 years rather than several decades could motivate more aggressive efforts to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. It would be very satisfying to see policy interventions having present rather than notional future benefits.

[Over 150,000 readers rely on The Conversation’s newsletters to understand the world. Sign up today.]

However, today, countries aren’t anywhere close to ending their fossil fuel use. Instead, all of the evidence points to humanity experiencing rapid global warming in the coming decades.

Our most robust finding is that the less carbon dioxide humans release, the better off humanity will be. Committed warming and human behavior point to a need to accelerate efforts both to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to adapt to this warming planet now, rather than simply talking about how much needs to happen in the future.

Richard B. (Ricky) Rood, Professor of Climate and Space Sciences and Engineering, University of Michigan

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Related Articles:

Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Business, Elon Musk

Do poison pills work? A finance expert explains the anti-takeover tool that Twitter hopes will keep Elon Musk at bay

Poison pills usually work, but Elon Musk appears undeterred. screenshot from china launch video

Tuugi Chuluun, Loyola University Maryland

Takeovers are usually friendly affairs. Corporate executives engage in top-secret talks, with one company or group of investors making a bid for another business. After some negotiating, the companies engaged in the merger or acquisition announce a deal has been struck.

But other takeovers are more hostile in nature. Not every company wants to be taken over. This is the case with Elon Musk’s US$43 billion bid to buy Twitter.

Companies have various measures in their arsenal to ward off such unwanted advances. One of the most effective anti-takeover measures is the shareholder rights plan, also more aptly known as a “poison pill.” It is designed to block an investor from accumulating a majority stake in a company.

Twitter adopted a poison pill plan on April 15, 2022, shortly after Musk unveiled his takeover offer in a Securities and Exchange filing.

I’m a scholar of corporate finance. Let me explain why poison pills have been effective at warding off unsolicited offers, at least until now.

What’s a poison pill?

Poison pills were developed in the early 1980s as a defense tactic against corporate raiders to effectively poison their takeover efforts – sort of reminiscent of the suicide pills that spies supposedly swallow if captured.

There are many variants of poison pills, but they generally increase the number of shares, which then dilutes the bidder’s stake and causes them a significant financial loss.

Let’s say a company has 1,000 shares outstanding valued at $10 each, which means the company has a market value of $10,000. An activist investor purchases 100 shares at the cost of $1,000 and accumulates a significant 10% stake in the company. But if the company has a poison pill that is triggered once any hostile bidder owns 10% of its stock, all other shareholders would suddenly have the opportunity to buy additional shares at a discounted price – say, half the market price. This has the effect of quickly diluting the activist investor’s original stake and also making it worth a lot less than it was before.

Twitter adopted a similar measure. If any shareholder accumulates a 15% stake in the company in a purchase not approved by the board of directors, other shareholders would get the right to buy additional shares at a discount, diluting the 9.2% stake Musk recently purchased.

Poison pills are useful in part because they can be adopted quickly, but they usually have expiration dates. The poison pill adopted by Twitter, for example, expires in one year.

A successful tactic

Many well-known companies such as Papa John’s, Netflix, JCPenney and Avis Budget Group have used poison pills to successfully fend off hostile takeovers. And nearly 100 companies adopted poison pills in 2020 because they were worried that their careening stock prices, caused by the pandemic market swoon, would make them vulnerable to hostile takeovers.

No one has ever triggered – or swallowed – a poison pill that was designed to fend off an unsolicited takeover offer, showing how effective such measures are at fending off takeover attempts.

These types of anti-takeover measures are generally frowned upon as a poor corporate governance practice that can hurt a company’s value and performance. They can be seen as impediments to the ability of shareholders and outsiders to monitor management, and more about protecting the board and management than attracting more generous offers from potential buyers.

However, shareholders may benefit from poison pills if they lead to a higher bid for the company, for example. This may be already happening with Twitter as another bidder – a $103 billion private equity firm – may have surfaced.

A poison pill isn’t foolproof, however. A bidder facing a poison pill could try to argue that the board is not acting in the best interests of shareholders and appeal directly to them through either a tender offer – buying shares directly from other shareholders at a premium in a public bid – or a proxy contest, which involves convincing enough fellow shareholders to join a vote to oust some or all of the existing board.

And judging by his tweets to his 82 million Twitter followers, that seems to be what Musk is doing.

[Like what you’ve read? Want more? Sign up for The Conversation’s daily newsletter.]

Tuugi Chuluun, Associate Professor of Finance, Loyola University Maryland

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Related

Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Find books on Music, Movies & Entertainment and many other topics at Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page

Apps, Elon Musk, Social Media, Twitter

New Elon Musk tweets Confirm he will not be a Silent Stakeholder: Board Seat Declined

In another weekend explosion, this time, revealing the hands on bent of ideas for TWX project

Once again the weekend is seeing a barrage of tweets from Elon Musk, this time with a solid bulls-eye on Twitter itself and changes he has on his wishlist. Implementation schedule appears to be, well, immediate.

https://bookshop.org/a/565/9780553418835

The first tweet we are featuring was a preview of just how much of an activist shareholder he is planning to be.

Looking forward to the first board meeting he will attend since his $2.9 billion 9.2% stake in the bird platform – Musk reposted a meme of his infamous “Ganja weed” interview – essentially creating an instant meme of memes:

**note – on Sunday night (April 10th, 2022) it was revealed that Elon Musk joining the board would not be a thing, after all. Most likely reason sited in the avalanche of reactions? A board seat would have capped the maximum investment / stake percentage at 14.9% and brought potentail legal issues. As the largest shareholder the door remains open to his acquiring the company outright, and continuing the activist direction clearly indicated in the tweets below…

Next, the constructive criticism started, first taking note (perhaps already up his sleeve as he contemplated shelling out 3 bil of pocket change) of how many of the accounts with the most followers post “very little content”. Summing up his thoughts with the question “Is Twitter dying?”

Next, in replies to himself he got granular, citing two very specific examples, how @taylorswift13 and @justinbieber are remiss when it comes to staying active and tweeting on a regular basis…

Apparently, the day was just beginning to get interesting, cause he posted a Yogi Berra-like conundrum next, pointing out that statistics, including this very one, presumably, are very often false. Posted at 1:14 PM he may have had a siesta and found himself ready to rumble cause with the next tweet at 5:03 PM things started to cook…

He dug into his infographic trove of insights and pulled out this re-tweeted gem, showing how the Weather Channel is distrusted by nearly 50% of Republicans and about 35% percent of Democrats.

This tweet is an interesting one as there has been a lot of hand wringing and dire predictions made in the “media” that Elon Musk, known as having a Libertarian prediliction, will somehow be Trump’s savior and that his idea of “free speech” is similar to those that are somewhere to the Right of Q-anon.

This, I would venture, is highly unlikely. It’s far more likely that his idea of free speech might actually be closer to, well what it sounds like, less censorship. Oddly both the left and the right are anticipating disappointment, and perhaps, that is one of those be-careful-what-you-wish-for things.

The tweets of April 9th, seem to bear out the idea that he will be active, vocal and, above all, amusing, but unlikely to follow any faction or party.

Next came more specific and sort of practical tweets, like this one suggesting twitter “sell” the authentication checkmark as part of the Twitter Blue $3 subscription package. This, bizarrely, is a great business concept, and might actually happen, crazy as it sounds.

After reflecting briefly on the idea, it became clear that the invention of a new plebian version of the coveted mark is needed, lest it be confused with the rare and hard to acquire “public figure” or “official” accounts.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1512957577092608004?s=21&t=p5FTMofYfTHgM4X5Gm2n8Q

A quick followup tweet with self replies included the observation that the edit tweet feature that has had much action this week is already a done deal in the future paid Twitter landscape.

Then, as if out of the blue like a bolt of lightening Elon decides that there should be no ads! Ok, so this does make sense in a genius billionaire kind-of-way here’s the new breakdown:

  1. Everybody pays $3 per moth
  2. Advertising is cancelled
  3. We all get checkmarks and an edit tweet feature
  4. Corporations stop “dictating policy”
  5. Twitter SF HQ is converted into a homeless shelter (unhoused refuge)
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1512962115270754306?s=21&t=p5FTMofYfTHgM4X5Gm2n8Q

Good idea?:

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1512966135423066116?s=21&t=p5FTMofYfTHgM4X5Gm2n8Q

Then, in a semi-final, inspired burst of sunshine, there’s a great suggestion – actually a tweet from earlier in the am – 7:39 to be exact but pinned for now, the man who must be heeded points out that “crypto scam accounts” represent a large percentage that should be subtracted from the real accounts. ow if they can just remove the 3 billion fake accounts across all social media…

Apparently not able to quit while ahead, or maybe under the influence of jet lag or substances, this gem dropped:

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1513045405029711878?s=21&t=Rw_ry5HVOGgsmXRxJJzSbA

Newest stories:

Check out Lynxotic on YouTube

Find books on Sustainable Energy Solutions and Climate Science and many other topics at our sister site: Cherrybooks on Bookshop.org

Lynxotic may receive a small commission based on any purchases made by following links from this page