Doomberg's grammer, logic, and rhetoric used to convey his information are admirable and instructive. Critical thinking is less pervasive than not even so long ago. Im grateful to have been able to listen to this conversation between the two of you.
Why is it a cartoon chicken is the 1st person to repeat to me the definition of science I learnt in my "failing public school" back in the 80s/ and 90s?
Wow! What a great conversation! Thank you both so much. Getting the “common” back in common sense is daunting. Keep digging, mining, drilling the points to the powerful minority. Hopefully the general public becomes more informed each day. Very much enjoyed this!
Not so fast Doomie! Increasing oil production to lower prices and economically harm Russia can have several drawbacks. Firstly, the oil market's complex dynamics mean a significant increase in supply could lead to unforeseen consequences, including economic instability in oil-dependent countries. Additionally, heightened oil production may create tensions with other oil-producing nations, such as OPEC members, leading to further geopolitical instability. Furthermore, while lower oil prices might offer a short-term solution, it fails to address the long-term geopolitical and economic challenges posed by Russia. Your suggestions verge on layman's perceptions of the oil market.
To say "this is the science" is similar to "this is the wind". You can not represent science (as a process as a scalar value of a measurable quantity) like wind speed. Both evolve and change as new evidence is presented. Regardless nuclear energy is the future, and I hope more people realis that this is the case,
Thorium nuclear reactors are becoming a reality. Water can power vehicles as was demonstrated by the late Stanely Meyer and Dennis Klien. Energy could become very cheap to almost free.
Canadian CANDU heavy water reactors can burn thorium, unmodified, by adding a bit if HALEU to the fuel bundles. Such a fuel is in development/approval, called ANEEL. Possibly 2025 or 2026.
Be careful about borrowing to buy equities anticipating hyperinflation. I'm pretty sure that bank loans were indexed to inflation, at least to some extent. Bankers have a way of looking after themselves.
That's where it appears to be going. Building giant concrete nuclear plants with old world construction materials (concrete, steel, cranes, construction workers) is too expensive now. But, the idea behind mini reactors is, they can be manufactured in automated factories in sections, put on trucks, assembled quickly on site, and shipped everywhere so that the same automated factory can build reactors for the entire country vs. Building one at a time "by hand" like we did in the 1970's It's the assembly line of buildings. Housing is going this way too.
@@rustyscrapper for efficiency scale matters though.. What you are talking about is micro reactors. The SMRs are still large and then when you try to produce the same amount of power as the large reactors you end up spending more money and they arent as efficient. The key with large nuclear is build lots of them in one location. Bruce Power in Ontario is a perfect example of that. They have 8 reactors in one location producing 6.5 GW of power. They are looking at adding another 4.8 GW to the same location. That entire site is only 2200 acres
We are always going to need liquid hydrocarbon fuel. Here's the thing. Electricity on the grid is one thing but you're going to need a liquid fuel for aircraft, ships at sea, and even rocket ships. Batteries will never be suitable for those uses. Natural fossil fuel is what we use but what do we do if we run out. With really cheap nuclear power We could use electricity to produce hydrogen and combine it with CO2 to produce synthetic gasoline with an energy density similar to regular gasoline. No crude oil needed. All you need is cheap nuclear energy water to be split into hydrogen and CO2 from wherever. Fischer-Tropsch (FT) Synthesis: A method used to convert the captured CO2 and the produced hydrogen into synthetic gasoline
Long terms rockets are arguable the only thing that wont go electric, battery energy densities are already approaching that which is sufficient for commercial aircraft, as i understand it in ten years we might have something suitable for intercontinental flight... Nuclear energy is in no way any longer competitive with solar/wind and batteries and while it's clearly still something we can do you do it only because we will always be able to find a use for energy...
Also, buy us some nuclear powered water desalination and wastewater treatment plants instead of spending money in other countries. So many could have been built at this point
@@user-lk7zr5hm9y Arguable not as many as the great depression.... It's strange that a bad peace can be as bad as a war but the saying doesn't exist without reason.
Brilliant Light Power SunCell is ten times cheaper and safer than conventional nuclear. You could safely put one in your car and home and never pay for fuel.
Smoking is bad for you, but the government's interest in it is inconsistent with the idea they are trying to help. There is a theory that smoking interferes with other things they are trying to do to the population.
While I am basically pro-nuclear, there are some major problems with it. Forget about waste, my issues with the current stock of reactors is that they only generate electricity, and not much waste heat. Therefore, they essentially have acted like a fig leaf for the nuclear weapons industry, as has been pointed out by one of Chris Nelder's guests. Electricity is obviously essential for civilization, but so is waste heat and chemical processing. So if they can't produce enough waste heat to manufacture steel, for example, the benefits of nuclear are not so clear, when you can produce electricity in other ways. Waste heat is the 800 pound gorilla in the room. It's a shame so many people are ignorant of that.
Based on your comments, it seems like you understand very little about how electricity is generated. In bio-mass, coal, and nuclear they all boil water to create steam to mechanically spin a steam turbine connected to a generator. Unless you are in a vacuum it takes heat to boil water. Nuclear operators produce as much heat as they want ie control the temperature to a set point. Pull up a picture of a nuclear power plant and you will see the large cooling towers used to dissipate the waste heat. The benefits of nuclear are very obvious with its energy density and low air(CO2, SO2 and NOx) emissions. Waste heat is not the 800 pound gorilla in the room. And BTW there are technologies to produce steel without coke using electromagnetism.
Coal, nat gas or nuclear work on the same principle - generate super hot steam, drive turbines and get electricity. If you are referring to steam used for industrial applications I don't see why you can't get some from nuclear
Doomberg says people outside the West will use the cheap electric vehicles China is producing without any regard to intellectual property. That implies that evs are going to have an effect on global energy use. "Malthusian", did the Reverend Thomas Malthus (1766-1834) ever imagine an animated green chicken would one day band his name about to a global audience.
Step 1: Evolve from petrodollar to carbon dollar Step2: World bank locks in the federal reserve note as the primary currency for all carbon credits Step3: US military enforces carbon credits worldwide
Uh, no, it's not. If it was, solar would be able to replace Oil & Gas, and it can't even do that. Wind, even less so. Your calculations are SO wrong it really begs the question: Are you an anti-energy, anti-Doomberg troll?! If not, did you even watch the same Podcast I did here?
Lol, wut? Solar is the least dense of them all. Even wind is better. Paying people to ride on bicycles with alternators on them is more energy dense then solar.
@@onlypranav If you include the exclusion/security zones around nuclear power stations i believe solar is more energy dense in land use. I am not saying we shouldn't do nuclear just that Solar works ludicrously well and will be unbeatable as batteries become ever cheaper.
15:00 "there's room for Russia, China, and the USA to coexist and develop." That's true at face value, but in a world where Russia (and possibly China) get a free pass to invade neighbors, there isn't any room for OTHER countries in the world, especially the neighbors of those states.
Russia is only doing what the USA does every few years so maybe someone should first set an example before pointing fingers? Do you think Ukraine would be invaded without the US backed orange revolution in 2005 and then finally the US staged coup in 2014?
14:00 re nuclear proliferation: it seems that if Russia can simply invade other countries WITHOUT any pushback from other countries, this is MORE likely to result in nuclear proliferation. EVERY small country in the region (Poland to start with, then Finland and the Baltics, probably also Taiwan and South Korea and others) are going to take the lesson that if the USA's support is lacking, their ONLY option is to develop their own nuclear weapons. This comes with increased risks of accidents, theft, and use of such weapons by terrorists, so is not a good thing. Increased American military support for Ukraine seems to me to be the best way to REDUCE the risk of nuclear war.
Russia would never allow Ukraine to gain or keep nuclear weapons; they would not have allowed it in 1991 and they never would have tolerated it after. As for Poland and all the rest the USA is absolutely not going to allow these countries to gain nuclear weapons and thus start possible developing independent foreign policies. The USA wont even allow Japan to get nukes as you just don't let your vassals have nukes.
Chinese aren't winning the Semiconductor race. The first thing that happens if the Chinese invade Taiwan is that all TSM factories and offices are bombed. Along with any engineers that work there. And the Semiconductor industry isn't just sitting around building the same chips they built 10 years ago. When the Chinese steal one design there are newer designs introduced. It will be forever a cat and mouse game. Once the US wises up and blocks Chinese students from US universities and companies, it will set them back even further. People forget that TSM, ASUS, and the Taiwan high tech industry in general was started by people who studied in the US and/or learned those skills working in US companies.
China graduates about nine times more engineers than the USA. China is producing 7nm chips now, and is expected to produce 5nm chips by the end of this year. This happened less than one year after the Intel CEO said that China is about ten years behind.
Listen to The RO Show on Apple Podcasts. Here is this episode: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/is-our-energy-crisis-intentional-doomberg-ep-127/id1656253562?i=1000655550914
100% on Nuclear Energy. So sad that we've set ourselves back 30 years. We could be exploring the solar system in-person by now.
Doomberg's grammer, logic, and rhetoric used to convey his information are admirable and instructive. Critical thinking is less pervasive than not even so long ago. Im grateful to have been able to listen to this conversation between the two of you.
As my father used to say when I was young, “more people have died in Ted Kennedy’s car than from nuclear waster…”
Mary Joe Kopeckney gave her life. 😂😂
Doomberg for president! 👏
Agreed, the economy would be unleashed, as all the hindrances (from current politics) would be argued out using logic
Why is it a cartoon chicken is the 1st person to repeat to me the definition of science I learnt in my "failing public school" back in the 80s/ and 90s?
Wow! What a great conversation! Thank you both so much. Getting the “common” back in common sense is daunting. Keep digging, mining, drilling the points to the powerful minority. Hopefully the general public becomes more informed each day. Very much enjoyed this!
Thank you so much! 😊
Doomberg for President!
Fantastic interview.
Glad you enjoyed it! Thank you! 🙏😊
More Doomberg please!
Awesome video!
Speaking the truth! Refreshing to hear.
Main stream media is putting out hot garbage. It is crazy that anyone listens or believes.
Thank you 😊
Great interview, thanks .
Thank you!
Not so fast Doomie! Increasing oil production to lower prices and economically harm Russia can have several drawbacks. Firstly, the oil market's complex dynamics mean a significant increase in supply could lead to unforeseen consequences, including economic instability in oil-dependent countries. Additionally, heightened oil production may create tensions with other oil-producing nations, such as OPEC members, leading to further geopolitical instability. Furthermore, while lower oil prices might offer a short-term solution, it fails to address the long-term geopolitical and economic challenges posed by Russia. Your suggestions verge on layman's perceptions of the oil market.
And yours on layman knowledge of Russia lol.
"Wow" the best interview with Doomber, I love there philosophy. Great chat. Thanks.
Glad you enjoyed it! Thank you! 🙏
Good to see you back!
To say "this is the science" is similar to "this is the wind". You can not represent science (as a process as a scalar value of a measurable quantity) like wind speed. Both evolve and change as new evidence is presented. Regardless nuclear energy is the future, and I hope more people realis that this is the case,
Thorium nuclear reactors are becoming a reality. Water can power vehicles as was demonstrated by the late Stanely Meyer and Dennis Klien. Energy could become very cheap to almost free.
Canadian CANDU heavy water reactors can burn thorium, unmodified, by adding a bit if HALEU to the fuel bundles. Such a fuel is in development/approval, called ANEEL. Possibly 2025 or 2026.
7:30 the idea of Congress voting to declare war (on Russia and/or China) is moot if they have ALREADY (de facto) declared war on the USA (and Europe).
With USA and Europe giving them means and resources for start one...
Great content as always if we see a green bird. Especially if a smart moderator is asking the right questions😊
Thank you! Glad you enjoyed it! 🙏
Of course it is INTENTIONAL!!!
Cyclical also! 😢
Thanking you
Wood is carbon neutral. It takes out of the air as much CO2 as it produces as long as you grow new to replace what you burn.
Doesn’t this administration need prices to fall to try to win this election. Why aren’t they doing it?
The US e government/empire is not a criminal organization as well doomberg?
Simply, we suck less than China and Russia ...
Be careful about borrowing to buy equities anticipating hyperinflation. I'm pretty sure that bank loans were indexed to inflation, at least to some extent. Bankers have a way of looking after themselves.
I love this! thank you
You're so welcome!
A small nuclear reactor possible, feasible? Interms of technology, economics, and time frame. Thank you
That's where it appears to be going. Building giant concrete nuclear plants with old world construction materials (concrete, steel, cranes, construction workers) is too expensive now.
But, the idea behind mini reactors is, they can be manufactured in automated factories in sections, put on trucks, assembled quickly on site, and shipped everywhere so that the same automated factory can build reactors for the entire country vs. Building one at a time "by hand" like we did in the 1970's
It's the assembly line of buildings. Housing is going this way too.
@@rustyscrapper for efficiency scale matters though.. What you are talking about is micro reactors. The SMRs are still large and then when you try to produce the same amount of power as the large reactors you end up spending more money and they arent as efficient. The key with large nuclear is build lots of them in one location. Bruce Power in Ontario is a perfect example of that. They have 8 reactors in one location producing 6.5 GW of power. They are looking at adding another 4.8 GW to the same location. That entire site is only 2200 acres
We are always going to need liquid hydrocarbon fuel. Here's the thing. Electricity on the grid is one thing but you're going to need a liquid fuel for aircraft, ships at sea, and even rocket ships. Batteries will never be suitable for those uses. Natural fossil fuel is what we use but what do we do if we run out. With really cheap nuclear power We could use electricity to produce hydrogen and combine it with CO2 to produce synthetic gasoline with an energy density similar to regular gasoline. No crude oil needed. All you need is cheap nuclear energy water to be split into hydrogen and CO2 from wherever.
Fischer-Tropsch (FT) Synthesis: A method used to convert the captured CO2 and the produced hydrogen into synthetic gasoline
Long terms rockets are arguable the only thing that wont go electric, battery energy densities are already approaching that which is sufficient for commercial aircraft, as i understand it in ten years we might have something suitable for intercontinental flight... Nuclear energy is in no way any longer competitive with solar/wind and batteries and while it's clearly still something we can do you do it only because we will always be able to find a use for energy...
Also, buy us some nuclear powered water desalination and wastewater treatment plants instead of spending money in other countries. So many could have been built at this point
“You cannot fed a single person injured by nuclear waste”
But...I saw a movie the other day that found 1000s!
Chernobyl has a few people harmed by nuclear bits and bites.
So no Soviet reactors.
But agree it’s the future at this point.
That's one smart chick.
WW2 cured The Great Depression
and destroyed millions and millions of families
@@user-lk7zr5hm9y Arguable not as many as the great depression.... It's strange that a bad peace can be as bad as a war but the saying doesn't exist without reason.
Brilliant Light Power SunCell is ten times cheaper and safer than conventional nuclear. You could safely put one in your car and home and never pay for fuel.
not available for consumer, last validation report filed 2021.
Smoking is bad for you, but the government's interest in it is inconsistent with the idea they are trying to help. There is a theory that smoking interferes with other things they are trying to do to the population.
Good morning Ro!
While I am basically pro-nuclear, there are some major problems with it. Forget about waste, my issues with the current stock of reactors is that they only generate electricity, and not much waste heat. Therefore, they essentially have acted like a fig leaf for the nuclear weapons industry, as has been pointed out by one of Chris Nelder's guests.
Electricity is obviously essential for civilization, but so is waste heat and chemical processing. So if they can't produce enough waste heat to manufacture steel, for example, the benefits of nuclear are not so clear, when you can produce electricity in other ways. Waste heat is the 800 pound gorilla in the room. It's a shame so many people are ignorant of that.
Superficial understanding
Based on your comments, it seems like you understand very little about how electricity is generated. In bio-mass, coal, and nuclear they all boil water to create steam to mechanically spin a steam turbine connected to a generator. Unless you are in a vacuum it takes heat to boil water. Nuclear operators produce as much heat as they want ie control the temperature to a set point. Pull up a picture of a nuclear power plant and you will see the large cooling towers used to dissipate the waste heat. The benefits of nuclear are very obvious with its energy density and low air(CO2, SO2 and NOx) emissions. Waste heat is not the 800 pound gorilla in the room. And BTW there are technologies to produce steel without coke using electromagnetism.
isnt wasteenergy just a term for energy which isnt used. Electricity can be easily be converted to heat, so whats the problem?
Coal, nat gas or nuclear work on the same principle - generate super hot steam, drive turbines and get electricity. If you are referring to steam used for industrial applications I don't see why you can't get some from nuclear
You probably mean "process heat" not "waste heat"? Process heat refers to the application of heat during industrial processes.
Doomberg says people outside the West will use the cheap electric vehicles China is producing without any regard to intellectual property. That implies that evs are going to have an effect on global energy use.
"Malthusian", did the Reverend Thomas Malthus (1766-1834) ever imagine an animated green chicken would one day band his name about to a global audience.
Step 1:
Evolve from petrodollar to carbon dollar
Step2:
World bank locks in the federal reserve note as the primary currency for all carbon credits
Step3:
US military enforces carbon credits worldwide
That may have been the plan, but the rise of BRICS+ may give the world alternatives to that system.
Is he blinken?
Energy density of solar power is higher than of nuclear in kj/kg
Uh, no, it's not.
If it was, solar would be able to replace Oil & Gas, and it can't even do that. Wind, even less so.
Your calculations are SO wrong it really begs the question: Are you an anti-energy, anti-Doomberg troll?!
If not, did you even watch the same Podcast I did here?
Lol, wut? Solar is the least dense of them all. Even wind is better.
Paying people to ride on bicycles with alternators on them is more energy dense then solar.
It takes large amount of area to collect decent amounts (GW+ for example) compared to fossil fuel or nuclear plants. So area wise not dense
@@onlypranav If you include the exclusion/security zones around nuclear power stations i believe solar is more energy dense in land use. I am not saying we shouldn't do nuclear just that Solar works ludicrously well and will be unbeatable as batteries become ever cheaper.
Yes its intentional....
Believe the bird.
In almost everything.
If you saw one doomberg interview, you saw all of doombergs interviews.
15:00 "there's room for Russia, China, and the USA to coexist and develop." That's true at face value, but in a world where Russia (and possibly China) get a free pass to invade neighbors, there isn't any room for OTHER countries in the world, especially the neighbors of those states.
Hillary and Oboma overthru a public elected Ukraine goverment.. we would not allow Russia missiles in Cuba nor Russia allow NATO missiles in Ukraine
Not American nato then?
Russia is only doing what the USA does every few years so maybe someone should first set an example before pointing fingers? Do you think Ukraine would be invaded without the US backed orange revolution in 2005 and then finally the US staged coup in 2014?
14:00 re nuclear proliferation: it seems that if Russia can simply invade other countries WITHOUT any pushback from other countries, this is MORE likely to result in nuclear proliferation. EVERY small country in the region (Poland to start with, then Finland and the Baltics, probably also Taiwan and South Korea and others) are going to take the lesson that if the USA's support is lacking, their ONLY option is to develop their own nuclear weapons. This comes with increased risks of accidents, theft, and use of such weapons by terrorists, so is not a good thing. Increased American military support for Ukraine seems to me to be the best way to REDUCE the risk of nuclear war.
Braindead!
The Ukraine War is most similar to The Vietnam War, which had very little impact on nuclear proliferation.
Russia would never allow Ukraine to gain or keep nuclear weapons; they would not have allowed it in 1991 and they never would have tolerated it after. As for Poland and all the rest the USA is absolutely not going to allow these countries to gain nuclear weapons and thus start possible developing independent foreign policies. The USA wont even allow Japan to get nukes as you just don't let your vassals have nukes.
conspiracy theories abound...usually that is due to limited intellect. false choices are the favorite tool of doomberg
For example?
Chinese aren't winning the Semiconductor race. The first thing that happens if the Chinese invade Taiwan is that all TSM factories and offices are bombed. Along with any engineers that work there. And the Semiconductor industry isn't just sitting around building the same chips they built 10 years ago. When the Chinese steal one design there are newer designs introduced. It will be forever a cat and mouse game. Once the US wises up and blocks Chinese students from US universities and companies, it will set them back even further. People forget that TSM, ASUS, and the Taiwan high tech industry in general was started by people who studied in the US and/or learned those skills working in US companies.
You are so naive
China graduates about nine times more engineers than the USA. China is producing 7nm chips now, and is expected to produce 5nm chips by the end of this year. This happened less than one year after the Intel CEO said that China is about ten years behind.
China cannot invaded China Tywan is China
Credit to the Biden administration? Doomberg, really? Who are you kidding up to?
this guy thinks an election is what the global politics and global economy is planned around?
That green avatar is too annoying. Unwatchable.
Listen to The RO Show on Apple Podcasts. Here is this episode:
podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/is-our-energy-crisis-intentional-doomberg-ep-127/id1656253562?i=1000655550914
Is she flirting with a green chicken.