What is eco modernist outlook on mass timber construction? A lot of traditional environmentalists hate it because they think it will lead to more deforestation.
My opinion is that mass timber construction will increase the demand for forestry in the long run since it will trees will become more economically valuable than using the land agriculture or mining. Mass timber construction might also become the largest carbon negative industry.
My assumption is that a lot of regulations around "environmentally sustainable forestry" is holding the industry back. If we deregulate the sector there will be more planting of fast growing (potentially genetically modified) trees.
My bigger concern would be land use. Any large scale use of mass timber will be produced by plantation forest, so I don't know that either the concern that it will drive deforestation or the benefit of more forest, at least in the way that is generally conceived are that significant. Might have some carbon removal benefit and of course depends on how alternative building materials are produced.
Well cement and steel are the most carbon intensive industries. So replacing them with a carbon negative material would be a big win for net emissions. But when we deregulate the sector it will replace "natural" forests with forestry optimised for construction material, which is what the environmentalist crowd is afraid of. There will probably also be biodiversity losses etc.
Sub Saharan Africa will be a good place for mass timber production. Fertile land and relatively low population density (except Nigeria and even with the high current birth rate). A country like Mozambique, for example, is not land locked and more than 90% of its arable land is not used for cultivation.
Yes. But from a carbon cycle perspective, you also need to account for land use change. So the question is what the LUC impacts will be versus whatever the alternative in terms of low carbon concrete or steel, which today, obviously, don't actually exist.
I mean normally when trees die they release methane. So in the long run trees aren't really carbon negative. But if we use them for construction they would be. In a deregulated environment the land use change will generally be in favour of reducing net carbon. That will come at a cost of probably more biodiversity losses.
My hope is that cultured meat dramatically reduces the demand for arable land. Hence making it easier to set up a deregulated mass timber industry. But that's a long shot.
What seems to be dead is the roll-up-our-sleeves spirit of 1970s environmentalism. Back in the day, a river burned, and the next thing you know, folks are cleaning up rivers, launching recycling programs, getting things done. Nixon signed all the great environmental legislation. Now, it's about marching in the streets, screaming and shouting, demanding that somebody do something, and raising money for politicians.
It's not that the do-it-ourselves spirit is dead, it's that it moved on to volunteer crisis response, building houses with Habitat for Humanity, writing open source software, and building cities in the dessert every year, at Burning Man. Meanwhile, try to take any initiative at home - and everybody and their brother is breathing down your throat - bureaucrats getting in your face, snake-oil salesmen trying to sell feel-good bullshit, politicians asking for money, folks complaining about your language -everything but actually advancing progress.
It's time to get serious about actually solving problems. And, to that end, I put in a plug for my own efforts to rebuild suburban communities - over at ThisOldNeighborhood.Net (thisoldneigbhorhood.substack.com). Where we're actually trying to get something done - and yes, we could use a little support - if only of the moral kind.
And yes, I'm feeling a bit frustrated right about now, after getting another ton of asks from politicians. Sigh...
That Patent was the first "over-unity" (although unclaimed) US Patent granted by the US Patent Office - and there have been several more granted since then.
My point is this: -- we have been correctly told / taught / by the Science of Classic Physics that a power source cannot produce more than it is physically / electrically capable of producing, i.e. "over-unity" anything is impossible.
But they never told / taught / -- "that one could not 'reduce the input power level'" -- which is exactly what a tank circuit does when it is "tuned".
It's just been assumed that there was no connection between a tuning circuit in a radio - and an electric power supply that can continuously "electronically produce" up to 480 VDC or VAC / 480 Amps, i.e., 230,400 Watts; 230.4 kW; or .2304 MW - however you care to describe it.
That "assumption" is wrong.
It has been:
--- US invented and first run on May 1st. 1982
--- US developed and pro. lab. tested at 293% "over-unity" on Sept. 10th. 1984 - producing 120 VAC / 60 Hz / sinusoidal output power while powering a 120 VAC motor;
--- US Patented -- US 5,146,395 / Sept. 8th. 1992 / and is ready for basic professional manufactured pc-board manufacturing today.
Every US person / US Government Agency / Us University / and US Commercial and VC Funding entity contacted -- uniformly refused to even consider offering any financial or technical aid to this project over it's privately (mostly self-funded) 50 + year development history.
So it's going to Europe -- first: -- at the official request of EC President Ursula von der Leyen - through the Office of Mr. Vincent Berrutto / Head of Unit / Directorate-General for Energy / EC.
The application was originally to be made through the EC horizon Europe funding program - but has been shifted to the EC / EIC Accelerator for Breakthrough / Disruptive Technology blended funding program:
And it is most likely "going to hit the fan" here in the US-- when electric bill payers and vehicle fuel bill purchasers find out that they have been denied continuous / environmentally "benign"/ "site available" electric power that can be installed either:
a.) "at" any existing or new "stationary" location; i.e., any home; apartment; office-space (per floor - per client); commercial; or industrial- site, or:
b.) "in" any existing or new "movable" vehicle -- by retrofitting-repowering each vehicle,, of any size, shape, or weight; with either directly connected AC power as required, or AC powered AC motor(s) as required:
--- be that vehicle on land / in or on the seas/ or in the air as a propeller; rotor; or hi-bypass jet powered private or commercial aircraft -- making available
b1.) unlimited range of travel and / or movement, and
b2.) unlimited time of travel and / or movement.
The electric power unit is named "the POD MOD" - short for "P"ower "O"n "D"emand "MOD"ule".
It is totally:
--- solid-state electronics / small - 2.5 cu. ft. / lightweight - 30 lb. / modular / inexpensive to produce - less than $2000 per unit;
--- "stand-alone" - it has it's own on-board "start-up" power source / eliminating any "recharging" or connection to an external power source:
--- can have multiples of units connected together for higher output power levels -- just like batteries.
In-short: if put to use -- it can supply continuous / clean / electric power:
--- to any site: -- by being installed "at" or "in" each site:
--- producing the required amount of clean electric power for each site:
--- for as long as that electric power is required by each site.
The POD MOD makes everything we presently use to produce electricity (including all "heat-sourced" (including Atomic or "future mini-Fusion") and Hydro-powered high voltage electric power plants /with their required electric power grids:
--- redundant.
You asked for Clean / Cheap / Electricity.
Try "wrapping one's head around" the availability of "up to full continuous capacity" per unit - at:
--- $0.10 per hour -- not per kW/Hr. -- per hour
--- which is $72 per 30 day month / long term - set rate lease for both "stationary and vehicular use".
The only thing that has to be done for the US market: -- is to find someone with the "where-with-all" - to "round-file 'Conventional Wisdom'" --and put the POD MOD to use - because everyone else on the "rock that we all live on" -- will be getting before the US Government will fund it for Us taxpayers -because there is the matter of US/DOE-IPO Title 17.
That has to be changed / amended / before The POD MOD can be Federally backed - as individual home / solar installations are presently being done through the US/DOE-PPA Funding Program.
Hello Mr. Nordhaus -- you will be receiving an email with an answer to what you have spelled out here.
Right now -- everything needs to be, and is "powered" by an external power source of some kind that eventually produces "electricity" form a remote location - and as stated on the Breakthrough's website first item, i.e., "...Make Clean Energy Cheap..." -- it's the environment that "takes the hit" to accomplish what we now have - or on the drawing boards / computer screens.
This didn't have to happen.
Nikola Tesla -- the man that discovered (in 1882) the multi-phase AC system the world uses today.
What is not known though - is that between the years 1890 and 1894 - he discovered / invented and US Patented - what has turned out to be:
--- all of the information needed to "electronically produce" -- "clean" electricity -- without continuously requiring that external power source -- once the circuitry is started.
That specific Tesla circuitry works as I just stated - in the form of the "radio station to radio station tuning circuitry" found in every AM of FM radio manufactured since he discovered and applied for his patent for the Radio:
--- on Mar. 20th. 1900
--- over 124 years ago.
There is no argument that you can "tune" a radio to a specific frequency, i.e., a specific radio station to listen to -- so there is no basis for argument that the circuitry works -- unless your totally biased against the obvious.
What is not commonly known - is that this same circuitry -- used exactly the same way as used for tuning to a radio station -- because the circuit:
--- "electrically reduces the input power level to itself - to the absolute minimum power level - while simultaneously producing the absolute maximum power within it.
It's called a "resonant 'tank circuit' -- and is the basis for US Patent 5,146,395 / A POWER SUPPLY INCLUDING TWO TANK CIRCUITS / with "regenerative feedback" - granted on Sept. 8th. 1992 / all 16 claims / no changes or redactions requested / in a little over one year from it's submittal date.
What is eco modernist outlook on mass timber construction? A lot of traditional environmentalists hate it because they think it will lead to more deforestation.
My opinion is that mass timber construction will increase the demand for forestry in the long run since it will trees will become more economically valuable than using the land agriculture or mining. Mass timber construction might also become the largest carbon negative industry.
My assumption is that a lot of regulations around "environmentally sustainable forestry" is holding the industry back. If we deregulate the sector there will be more planting of fast growing (potentially genetically modified) trees.
My bigger concern would be land use. Any large scale use of mass timber will be produced by plantation forest, so I don't know that either the concern that it will drive deforestation or the benefit of more forest, at least in the way that is generally conceived are that significant. Might have some carbon removal benefit and of course depends on how alternative building materials are produced.
Well cement and steel are the most carbon intensive industries. So replacing them with a carbon negative material would be a big win for net emissions. But when we deregulate the sector it will replace "natural" forests with forestry optimised for construction material, which is what the environmentalist crowd is afraid of. There will probably also be biodiversity losses etc.
Sub Saharan Africa will be a good place for mass timber production. Fertile land and relatively low population density (except Nigeria and even with the high current birth rate). A country like Mozambique, for example, is not land locked and more than 90% of its arable land is not used for cultivation.
Yes. But from a carbon cycle perspective, you also need to account for land use change. So the question is what the LUC impacts will be versus whatever the alternative in terms of low carbon concrete or steel, which today, obviously, don't actually exist.
I mean normally when trees die they release methane. So in the long run trees aren't really carbon negative. But if we use them for construction they would be. In a deregulated environment the land use change will generally be in favour of reducing net carbon. That will come at a cost of probably more biodiversity losses.
My hope is that cultured meat dramatically reduces the demand for arable land. Hence making it easier to set up a deregulated mass timber industry. But that's a long shot.
What seems to be dead is the roll-up-our-sleeves spirit of 1970s environmentalism. Back in the day, a river burned, and the next thing you know, folks are cleaning up rivers, launching recycling programs, getting things done. Nixon signed all the great environmental legislation. Now, it's about marching in the streets, screaming and shouting, demanding that somebody do something, and raising money for politicians.
It's not that the do-it-ourselves spirit is dead, it's that it moved on to volunteer crisis response, building houses with Habitat for Humanity, writing open source software, and building cities in the dessert every year, at Burning Man. Meanwhile, try to take any initiative at home - and everybody and their brother is breathing down your throat - bureaucrats getting in your face, snake-oil salesmen trying to sell feel-good bullshit, politicians asking for money, folks complaining about your language -everything but actually advancing progress.
It's time to get serious about actually solving problems. And, to that end, I put in a plug for my own efforts to rebuild suburban communities - over at ThisOldNeighborhood.Net (thisoldneigbhorhood.substack.com). Where we're actually trying to get something done - and yes, we could use a little support - if only of the moral kind.
And yes, I'm feeling a bit frustrated right about now, after getting another ton of asks from politicians. Sigh...
to continue:
That Patent was the first "over-unity" (although unclaimed) US Patent granted by the US Patent Office - and there have been several more granted since then.
My point is this: -- we have been correctly told / taught / by the Science of Classic Physics that a power source cannot produce more than it is physically / electrically capable of producing, i.e. "over-unity" anything is impossible.
But they never told / taught / -- "that one could not 'reduce the input power level'" -- which is exactly what a tank circuit does when it is "tuned".
It's just been assumed that there was no connection between a tuning circuit in a radio - and an electric power supply that can continuously "electronically produce" up to 480 VDC or VAC / 480 Amps, i.e., 230,400 Watts; 230.4 kW; or .2304 MW - however you care to describe it.
That "assumption" is wrong.
It has been:
--- US invented and first run on May 1st. 1982
--- US developed and pro. lab. tested at 293% "over-unity" on Sept. 10th. 1984 - producing 120 VAC / 60 Hz / sinusoidal output power while powering a 120 VAC motor;
--- US Patented -- US 5,146,395 / Sept. 8th. 1992 / and is ready for basic professional manufactured pc-board manufacturing today.
Every US person / US Government Agency / Us University / and US Commercial and VC Funding entity contacted -- uniformly refused to even consider offering any financial or technical aid to this project over it's privately (mostly self-funded) 50 + year development history.
So it's going to Europe -- first: -- at the official request of EC President Ursula von der Leyen - through the Office of Mr. Vincent Berrutto / Head of Unit / Directorate-General for Energy / EC.
The application was originally to be made through the EC horizon Europe funding program - but has been shifted to the EC / EIC Accelerator for Breakthrough / Disruptive Technology blended funding program:
And it is most likely "going to hit the fan" here in the US-- when electric bill payers and vehicle fuel bill purchasers find out that they have been denied continuous / environmentally "benign"/ "site available" electric power that can be installed either:
a.) "at" any existing or new "stationary" location; i.e., any home; apartment; office-space (per floor - per client); commercial; or industrial- site, or:
b.) "in" any existing or new "movable" vehicle -- by retrofitting-repowering each vehicle,, of any size, shape, or weight; with either directly connected AC power as required, or AC powered AC motor(s) as required:
--- be that vehicle on land / in or on the seas/ or in the air as a propeller; rotor; or hi-bypass jet powered private or commercial aircraft -- making available
b1.) unlimited range of travel and / or movement, and
b2.) unlimited time of travel and / or movement.
The electric power unit is named "the POD MOD" - short for "P"ower "O"n "D"emand "MOD"ule".
It is totally:
--- solid-state electronics / small - 2.5 cu. ft. / lightweight - 30 lb. / modular / inexpensive to produce - less than $2000 per unit;
--- "stand-alone" - it has it's own on-board "start-up" power source / eliminating any "recharging" or connection to an external power source:
--- can have multiples of units connected together for higher output power levels -- just like batteries.
In-short: if put to use -- it can supply continuous / clean / electric power:
--- to any site: -- by being installed "at" or "in" each site:
--- producing the required amount of clean electric power for each site:
--- for as long as that electric power is required by each site.
The POD MOD makes everything we presently use to produce electricity (including all "heat-sourced" (including Atomic or "future mini-Fusion") and Hydro-powered high voltage electric power plants /with their required electric power grids:
--- redundant.
You asked for Clean / Cheap / Electricity.
Try "wrapping one's head around" the availability of "up to full continuous capacity" per unit - at:
--- $0.10 per hour -- not per kW/Hr. -- per hour
--- which is $72 per 30 day month / long term - set rate lease for both "stationary and vehicular use".
You've got Clean / Cheap / Electricity -- available.
The only thing that has to be done for the US market: -- is to find someone with the "where-with-all" - to "round-file 'Conventional Wisdom'" --and put the POD MOD to use - because everyone else on the "rock that we all live on" -- will be getting before the US Government will fund it for Us taxpayers -because there is the matter of US/DOE-IPO Title 17.
That has to be changed / amended / before The POD MOD can be Federally backed - as individual home / solar installations are presently being done through the US/DOE-PPA Funding Program.
Hello Mr. Nordhaus -- you will be receiving an email with an answer to what you have spelled out here.
Right now -- everything needs to be, and is "powered" by an external power source of some kind that eventually produces "electricity" form a remote location - and as stated on the Breakthrough's website first item, i.e., "...Make Clean Energy Cheap..." -- it's the environment that "takes the hit" to accomplish what we now have - or on the drawing boards / computer screens.
This didn't have to happen.
Nikola Tesla -- the man that discovered (in 1882) the multi-phase AC system the world uses today.
What is not known though - is that between the years 1890 and 1894 - he discovered / invented and US Patented - what has turned out to be:
--- all of the information needed to "electronically produce" -- "clean" electricity -- without continuously requiring that external power source -- once the circuitry is started.
That specific Tesla circuitry works as I just stated - in the form of the "radio station to radio station tuning circuitry" found in every AM of FM radio manufactured since he discovered and applied for his patent for the Radio:
--- on Mar. 20th. 1900
--- over 124 years ago.
There is no argument that you can "tune" a radio to a specific frequency, i.e., a specific radio station to listen to -- so there is no basis for argument that the circuitry works -- unless your totally biased against the obvious.
What is not commonly known - is that this same circuitry -- used exactly the same way as used for tuning to a radio station -- because the circuit:
--- "electrically reduces the input power level to itself - to the absolute minimum power level - while simultaneously producing the absolute maximum power within it.
It's called a "resonant 'tank circuit' -- and is the basis for US Patent 5,146,395 / A POWER SUPPLY INCLUDING TWO TANK CIRCUITS / with "regenerative feedback" - granted on Sept. 8th. 1992 / all 16 claims / no changes or redactions requested / in a little over one year from it's submittal date.