Feb 24

Chile and Brazil are among the places to watch in a post-fossil-fuels world.

Chile and Brazil are among the places to watch in a post-fossil-fuels world.

“A country that creates green energy infrastructure, before political and economic control shifts to a new group of “world powers”, will ensure it is less susceptible to future influence or to being held hostage by a lithium or copper giant.

“But late adopters will find their strategy comes at a high price. Finally, it will be important for countries with resources not to sell themselves cheaply to the first bidder in the hope of making quick money, because, as the major oil producers will find out over the next decades, nothing lasts forever.”

Originally shared by Greg Batmarx

Imagine a world where every country has not only complied with the Paris climate agreement but has moved away from fossil fuels entirely. How would such a change affect global politics?

The 20th century was dominated by coal, oil and natural gas, but a shift to zero-emission energy generation and transport means a new set of elements will become key.

Solar energy, for instance, still primarily uses silicon technology, for which the major raw material is the rock quartzite.

Lithium represents the key limiting resource for most batteries, while rare earth metals, in particular “lanthanides” such as neodymium, are required for the magnets in wind turbine generators. Copper is the conductor of choice for wind power, being used in the generator windings, power cables, transformers and inverters.

In considering this future it is necessary to understand who wins and loses by a switch from carbon to silicon, copper, lithium, and rare earth metals…

The list of countries that would become the new “renewables superpowers” contains some familiar names, but also a few wild cards. The largest reserves of quartzite (for silicon production) are found in China, the US, and Russia, but also Brazil and Norway. The US and China are also major sources of copper, although their reserves are decreasing, which has pushed Chile, Peru, Congo and Indonesia to the fore.

Chile also has, by far, the largest reserves of lithium, ahead of China, Argentina and Australia. Factoring in lower-grade “resources”, which can’t yet be extracted, bumps Bolivia and the US onto the list. Finally, rare earth resources are greatest in China, Russia, Brazil, and Vietnam.

Salt flats in South America contain much of the world’s lithium. Guido Amrein Switzerland / shutterstock

Of all the fossil fuel producing countries, it is the US, China, Russia and Canada that could most easily transition to green energy resources.

In fact it is ironic that the US, perhaps the country most politically resistant to change, might be the least affected as far as raw materials are concerned. But it is important to note that a completely new set of countries will also find their natural resources are in high demand.

An OPEC for renewables?

The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) is a group of 14 nations that together contain almost half the world’s oil production and most of its reserves. It is possible that a related group could be created for the major producers of renewable energy raw materials, shifting power away from the Middle East and towards central Africa and, especially, South America.

This is unlikely to happen peacefully. Control of oilfields was a driver behind many 20th-century conflicts and, going back further, European colonisation was driven by a desire for new sources of food, raw materials, minerals and, later, oil. The switch to renewable energy may cause something similar. As a new group of elements become valuable for turbines, solar panels or batteries, rich countries may ensure they have secure supplies through a new era of colonisation.

China has already started what may be termed “economic colonisation”, setting up major trade agreements to ensure raw material supply. In the past decade it has made a massive investment in African mining, while more recent agreements with countries such as Peru and Chile have spread Beijing’s economic influence in South America.

Or a new era of colonisation?

Given this background, two versions of the future can be envisaged. The first possibility is the evolution of a new OPEC-style organisation with the power to control vital resources including silicon, copper, lithium, and lanthanides. The second possibility involves 21st-century colonisation of developing countries, creating super-economies. In both futures there is the possibility that rival nations could cut off access to vital renewable energy resources, just as major oil and gas producers have done in the past.

On the positive side there is a significant difference between fossil fuels and the chemical elements needed for green energy. Oil and gas are consumable commodities. Once a natural gas power station is built, it must have a continuous supply of gas or it stops generating. Similarly, petrol-powered cars require a continued supply of crude oil to keep running.

In contrast, once a wind farm is built, electricity generation is only dependent on the wind (which won’t stop blowing any time soon) and there is no continuous need for neodymium for the magnets or copper for the generator windings. In other words solar, wind, and wave power require a one-off purchase in order to ensure long-term secure energy generation.

The shorter lifetime of cars and electronic devices means that there is an ongoing demand for lithium. Improved recycling processes would potentially overcome this continued need. Thus, once the infrastructure is in place access to coal, oil or gas can be denied, but you can’t shut off the sun or wind. It is on this basis that the US Department of Defense sees green energy as key to national security.

A country that creates green energy infrastructure, before political and economic control shifts to a new group of “world powers”, will ensure it is less susceptible to future influence or to being held hostage by a lithium or copper giant.

But late adopters will find their strategy comes at a high price. Finally, it will be important for countries with resources not to sell themselves cheaply to the first bidder in the hope of making quick money, because, as the major oil producers will find out over the next decades, nothing lasts forever.

http://theconversation.com/meet-the-new-renewable-superpowers-nations-that-boss-the-materials-used-for-wind-and-solar-91680

Feb 22

It’s a good thing, I think, that there are people whose job is to figure out how we move forward into a sustainable…

It’s a good thing, I think, that there are people whose job is to figure out how we move forward into a sustainable and resilient future for humanity from the place we’re in now.

I hope they’re good at that job, and good at convincing other people to join them.

Originally shared by Singularity Hub

How ‘Cultural Evolution’ Can Give Us the Tools to Build Global-Scale Resilience http://suhub.co/2Fmo0rw

Feb 21

As someone who values becoming right over proving that I was right, and who doesn’t identify strongly with labels or…

As someone who values becoming right over proving that I was right, and who doesn’t identify strongly with labels or tribes, this makes some sense to me: most people aren’t like that.

Originally shared by Neuroscience News

How Political Parties Influence Our Belief, and What We Can Do About It

Psychologists suggest that valuing our identity more than our accuracy is what leads us to accept incorrect information that aligns with our political party’s beliefs. This value discrepancy, they say, can explain why high-quality news sources are no longer enough–and understanding it can help us find better strategies to bridge the political divide.

The research is in Trends in Cognitive Sciences. (full open access)

http://neurosciencenews.com/belief-politics-8531/
Feb 19

Clearly, there’s no way that this could possibly go wrong.

Clearly, there’s no way that this could possibly go wrong.

Given that a simple error in an Excel spreadsheet helped to spread the myth that prosperity could be attained through austerity (https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/04/microsoft-excel-the-ruiner-of-global-economies/).

Originally shared by Singularity Hub

The Democratization of AI Is Putting Powerful Tools in the Hands of Non-Experts http://suhub.co/2obpYDL

Feb 18

Humanoid robots, in many ways, don’t make a lot of sense.

Humanoid robots, in many ways, don’t make a lot of sense. For almost every conceivable application, using humans instead gives better results – except, of course, in cases where it would be abusive to use humans, in which case there are other kinds of concern about why you’re even doing that thing, and whether you should be doing it to something that closely resembles a human.

Be that as it may, the idea of humanoid robots is a powerful one, and there are people working to produce them – hoping, perhaps, to learn more about humanity in the process?

Originally shared by Singularity Hub

What Roboticists Are Learning From Early Generations of Lifelike Humanoid Robots http://suhub.co/2Gqbs1z

Feb 17

How do you get to understand – and then alter – the genome of yeast?

How do you get to understand – and then alter – the genome of yeast?

By rebuilding it from scratch, with some hooks built in to make it programmable. What we sometimes call “enhancement points” in the ERP world.

And once you’ve done that, what can you do with yeast? Well, besides its traditional applications in making beer and bread, it’s already used to produce medicines and other useful biologicals.

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610180/why-redesigning-the-humble-yeast-could-kick-off-the-next-industrial-revolution/

Feb 17

I’m well aware, of course, that language changes; I studied English language for my master’s, after all, including…

I’m well aware, of course, that language changes; I studied English language for my master’s, after all, including Old English and Middle English. I know that change is inevitable, and resisting it is futile.

At the same time, I advise people who are writing today to know and follow today’s conventions – by which I mean the conventions followed by today’s most skilled writers. I posted a piece a little while back about the five errors I see most frequently in published fiction: missing past perfect tense, “may” instead of “might” in past tense free indirect speech, over-application of the coordinate comma, missing the vocative comma, and missing or (more frequently) misplacing the apostrophe.

All of those are conventions. They’ve been different in the past – in some cases, the not particularly distant past – and will doubtless be different in the future, should we last so long. But if you don’t use the conventions because you don’t know the conventions, you don’t look as professional as the people who do.

And then there are matters of clarity. If you use “enormity” to mean “enormousness”, you now have two words that mean the same thing instead of meaning very different things, and you’ve lost the ability to mean the first thing without some extra contextual cues that tell your readers that’s actually what you mean. If you dangle your modifiers, you not only reveal that your thinking is a bit fuzzy; you risk making a seriously-intended piece ridiculous, which will distract readers from your point. If you use “alright” instead of “all right”, at least some readers will object (even though that’s a change that’s probably now inevitable, and will join “altogether” and “anymore” in the category of “compressed words that mean something subtly different from the uncompressed version”).

I suppose my point is: think about language. Be aware of it. If you’re a writer, it’s both your tool and your medium, just as brushes and paint are for an artist. Be aware of what your language is doing and what it’s conveying about you to various groups of readers. Don’t just slap it on any old way; think about the brushstrokes and the colour wheel.

But don’t obsess about the brushstrokes, or insist on only using the ones that appear in classic paintings, and none of your newfangled acrylics, either, and my art teacher when I was nine years old never let me do X, and…

If you’re an editor, or a book reviewer, I believe you have a form of professional responsibility and also an explicit or implicit invitation (respectively) to critique an author’s usage as well as their style, craft, and other choices. If they’re offering a product for sale, it should be professionally prepared to the best of their ability, and following current conventions is part of that. Otherwise, try not to get too wound up about other people’s brushstrokes. There are more important things; and some of the strokes are changing, whether you like it or not.

Originally shared by Karen Conlin

An excellent post, as always, from my colleague James Harbeck.

https://sesquiotic.wordpress.com/2018/02/17/our-strange-language-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-language-change/