I read a story about the American Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen going to China - ‘Trade protectionism measures not helpful in solving overcapacity issues’, that she is concerned with the so-called ‘over-capacity’ of China’s production of electric cars and of solar panels. Considering that inexpensive and reliable Chinese electric cars are nor allowed to be sold in the United States (or in Canada!!!) I don’t know what she’s complaining about!?!
As some commenters have pointed out - “she should be more concerned about American ‘over-capacity’ in money printing!!!”
Note: some of us are less interested in what she says, and more interested in what she eats [i.e. no more magic mushrooms, eh] - ‘Janet Yellen's latest culinary adventure’.
And then I read a story about Europe - ‘EU probe of Chinese wind turbines protectionist behavior’, that China describes as ‘the rising tendency of protectionism in the EU’ that ‘will damage mutually beneficial cooperation between China and Europe’. And all this confuses some of us, because the free-traders are against free trade - when it’s not for the benefit of the North Atlanteans.
And a little birdie asked me, if the North Atlanteans were truly interested in transitioning to a low-carbon economy, then wouldn’t they want to cooperate with China - the world’s biggest producer of electric cars, and solar panels, and wind turbines. But they aren’t doing that.
And so I thought that maybe all this talk is just that - all talk. That it’s simply meant to hide their real agenda, because it would seem that the North Atlanteans don’t want to have a zero-carbon economy, but really want to have a zero-growth economy - including zero-population-growth. Perhaps, all this talk is just another form of psychological warfare - it’s only meant to get us to think in a certain way!
And then I read a story about hydrogen - ‘Hydrogen or Synthetic Fossil Fuels?’, that:
“There is an old joke that ‘hydrogen is the energy of the future, and always will be’.”
and that while hydrogen has a higher energy per mass than gasoline, it has only 1/3 the energy per volume as natural gas, and this is important because:
“fossil fuels are so competitive, because transportation takes place in volumes, not mass”.
So, while hydrogen may be used in fixed route, fixed distance rail transportation, it will be uneconomical for cars and trucks, or for aviation. Also there is the environmentalists’ concern because hydrogen is a green house gas, and any hydrogen leaks would offset any benefits from reducing fossil fuel use. Too bad, so sad.
But then I read a story about nuclear reactor research in Russia - ‘Fast reactor can increase utilization rate of uranium resources 60-fold’, that Russia is nearing completion of a lead-cooled fast reactor [i.e. breeder reactor] and that Russia’s sodium-cooled fast neutron research reactor is scheduled to be finished by 2027.
“By establishing a fast reactor nuclear energy system and implementing a closed fuel cycle, uranium resource recycling can be achieved, increasing the utilization rate of uranium resources from less than 1 percent to around 60 percent.”
This will allow Russia to gain a major leap in fourth-generation nuclear reactor research. And what is happening in Canada, you might ask? Well …
In June 1966, construction began on Ontario Hydro’s first nuclear reactor, and by July 1985, construction began on its 20th nuclear reactor - an average of 1 reactor built per year!!! simply awesome!!! [Thank you Leslie Frost]
Then in 1986, due to the propaganda from the Chernobyl accident, all new nuclear reactor construction was put on hold, and it was further sabotaged when the infamous Maurice Strong was appointed head of Ontario Hydro in 1992 until 1995!!! Somehow it managed to survive, but now, the only new construction for the future is one small modular reactor.
It’s like we simply stopped moving forward in 1985!?! at the first generation reactors. And the problem is supposed to be China’s over-capacity? Perhaps it’s because our brains are running under-capacity.