Taken From: Emergency Debate: Covid-19 Protests for HoC Sitting No. 25 House of Commons
Location: West Block – Chamber
Date of Recording: Monday, Feb 7, 2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeHJcw_GrmY

Posted by: Rae | Feb 8 2022 20:05 utc | 303

Melaleuca @255: “Here’s an update on the Laos China railroad… Great outcome for a small landlocked country…”
[Gruff, in a devious tone while rubbing hands together]: “Excellent! Everything going according to plan!”
I’ve mentioned it a few times before, but it’s worth a repeat: I think people will be stunned by how quickly the smaller countries along the BRI will develop middle income economies. This is doubly true for countries like Laos that can plan their development rather than just whoring their country out to market forces.
We are all accustomed to the slow or even non-existent development that countries “enjoy” under imperial domination from the US and Europe, but China’s BRI is something fundamentally different. While China’s overall BRI plan spans decades, we are going to see Laos make huge strides by the end of the 2020s with poverty elimination and with modernization. If you like the rougher and less polished look, then you might want to schedule you visit to Vientiane pretty soon.

Posted by: William Gruff | Feb 8 2022 21:31 utc | 305

@oldhippie #295
You said

New reactors are not built because it is completely not cost effective. Even with government supplied zero liability it is completely not cost effective. Actually it never was. They were built as an adjunct to the weapons program.

Can you unpack this a bit? In particular, I’d like to understand how much the omnipresent lawfare by anti-nuclear types affects costs. I actually have known several people involved in the nuclear industry: one was in the section management for nuclear construction in the NW US – thrown out of work by the post-3 mile island reaction so he went back to school and wound up at AMD with me. Another is a Russian nuclear engineer in Japan to help them ramp up new tech nuclear reactors (this is over 20 years ago, long before Fukushima).
I’ve had long conversations with both – neither of them believed what you state above: that nuclear reactors are not cost effective. France’s experience also doesn’t seem to echo your view, hence the question.
You said

Do you see what I meant above that US is not culturally capable of operating nuclear? They will be run to failure because we want the juice.

Is your father’s experience indicative of the entire industry or just Con Edison? It also seems that you are talking about your father’s experience, not your own.
In any case, this statement makes it sound more like a human execution issue than any structural, economic or physical limitations – like the people working there are literally all Homer Simpsons…

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 8 2022 22:34 utc | 307

c1ue @ 307
Well, Matt Groening had a long residency in Chicago and Homer Simpson does work at the Springfield NPP.
What sort of humans do you imagine will do the execution? We have the human material we have. Who do you think lives near the rural locations where NPPs are sited? Many reasons why personnel is ex-Navy.
Yes, this is mostly my father’s experience. He was getting phone calls right up to the end, in hospice, in 2011. I was there for some of those calls. As I was there when the team met in our family kitchen or at the picnic table in the backyard. And the fleet is exactly the same fleet. As supplied by GE and Westinghouse the plants just did not work. The re-engineering was done mostly in the 70s and was carried out just as I saw it. What was done around our kitchen table is the fleet we have.
Sure France is different. That example is used constantly for good reason. This ain’t France.
IMO what I am saying here is indicative of the whole industry. On just one occasion my father did pretty much meet the entire industry. That would have been Three Mile Island. It was all hands on deck. No one knew wtf they were doing. My father”s expertise was almost all unique to the Com Ed fleet and he was still needed. And rapidly moved to the head table. And just as rapidly dismissed when he got to the head table because he was too smart and saw too much. One tidbit he did see. His personal dosimeter came in at 500 times the exposure that showed on his official dosimeter. If real dosimeters had been official every single person in US who had a clue would have been past the lifetime limit and retired right there.
Go over to YouTube and watch the small assortment of video for the final demolition of the Zion NPP. It is dropped in dust clouds and the radiation is left to blow away in the wind. Note that Energy Solutions is basically the Mormon Church. Since there was no possible technical solution they made it a political solution. Mormons bought it for $1 as scrap and no one messes with the Mormon elders. Even the Mormons found it was just too bloody hot to touch and stalled for ten or fifteen years. Zion was never fully commissioned, only had a series of tests and short low power runs.So the coolest reactor ever. Watch the vids and see billions of dollars blowing away in the wind. Yes it is expensive. The scrap and radioactive waste was fly dumped out on the Bonneville salt flats.

Posted by: oldhippie | Feb 8 2022 23:15 utc | 309

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 8 2022 16:57 utc | 295
Normally I would say “let’s agree to disagree” and leave it at that. But the subject of climate change is one of the most important issues that we face, so I must respond.
Firstly, wrpst to the details of climate change science, you are right – I don’t know shit. And because of that I rely on expert opinion. I have followed the science, for at least 30 years, from the comfort of my armchair, but any interpretation on my part would likely be subject to cherrypicking, bias, arm waving and various types of technical error. That is why I would never ever present myself an authority on the subject. Now I must admit it is possible that you know different shit than that shit I don’t know about. I hope so, because if not you are presenting yourself as an authority, and you are endangering rational evidence-based discussion on this critical subject.
That’s not to say that your arguments and similar arguments don’t have followers, including many on this blog, as well as many in the engineering community. Many cling to the hope that science is wrong and that they don’t have to change their ways. I also have to admit that I too occasionally have denialist tendencies, and yes – my carbon footprint is far too large.
Again, those who bet against scientific consensus (especially mature ones such as that on climate change) tend to lose in the long term. In this case, we will all lose, and I am very sorry for that.

Posted by: retiredmecheng | Feb 9 2022 1:52 utc | 311

@ retiredmecheng | Feb 9 2022 1:52 utc | 311 about scientific consensus
Some of us MoA barflies believe that the scientific consensus about the mRNA “vaccines” was bought and sold to the public…and continues to be bought and sold to the public, IMO
Why is your “parent” government ending mandatory masks but not Canada? Just to spite the truckers?
Have your read the latest by Michael Hudson at the Saker that others have linked to here? I encourage you to read that and consider the financialization of everything cancer to be like what we have done to our world’s climate……and I am one that thinks it is never too late to try and make things better and continue to push for public finance in the West…..our species may be mature enough to handle it….grin….at least we ought to try.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Feb 9 2022 6:36 utc | 313

@oldhippie #309
Thank you for the additional background.
I won’t disagree with your and your father’s assessment; I will note, however, that the demonization of nuclear power – even before 3 mile island – likely is a major part of why there are no Americans with either interest or experience in nuclear engineering outside of the Navy. Just imagine what it must be like for some aspiring undergraduate to study to be a nuclear engineer given the climate in American colleges.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 9 2022 13:23 utc | 315

@retiredmecheng #311
It is funny – I put forward some examples and questions; you respond that these examples and questions aren’t valid because there is “hard evidence” to the contrary.
I ask you for these examples and you then retreat into “consensus” and “experts”.
How can I fail to conclude that you are simply parroting a line and have not actually looked into detail at what you believe?
It is 100% clear that you have not done even the most basic examination of the subject – neither reading the IPCC reports nor looking at any of the research.
Is this how you performed your work before retirement – just taking for granted everything you were told?
I reiterate – such faith is the opposite of real world engineering. Perhaps you were a teacher as opposed to an actual mechanical engineer making things.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 9 2022 13:44 utc | 317

Re: Canada
I think this is old – 2019 era but could be wrong (2021?). But still interesting. Canadians – what do you think?
The Future of Canada by Peter Zeihan

Simply put, from American point of view, the Mexican demography is the demography of the perfect partner.
Canada’s is not.
Canada’s population bulge isn’t among the young workers who complement the American economic structure, but instead among the mature-worker demographic who compete. A demographic bulge in the 40-65 bracket means Canada is super-saturated with high-skill workers. This extra supply depresses the cost of skilled labor within the Canadian system, which has a similar impact upon the price of the goods the country’s skilled labor force produces.
Even worse, the lack of 20- and 30-something Canadians means Canada cannot even consume its own production. It must dump that production on foreign markets, and proximity alone means that some 75% of it goes to the United States. Economically, Canada isn’t a partner. It is a competitor, and that’s before one considers the Canadian tendency to subsidize industries as unrelated as dairy and aerospace and timber and electricity.
…
Mexico’s market is growing. Yours is not. Your market is protected. Mexico’s is not. The Mexican labor force is complementary to ours. Yours is not. We have a deal with the country that matters, and that isn’t you. We are leaving NAFTA. You know our terms. Take them or leave them. We are moving on.
In a single searing moment of revelation, everything that had guaranteed Canada leverage over America, everything that granted Canada a place in the world, everything that had generated any meaningful international influence, had evaporated. Canada capitulated within days and signed on for NAFTA2.
…
Again, Canada is not a normal place. Unlike the United States where the states and federal government exercise roughly equal amounts of power, in Canada the provinces are preeminent and often have the ability to block federal policies they do not like. The country didn’t even get its first comprehensive internal free trade agreement until 2017.
As such, the provinces of Canada function less like components of a common country, and more like a loose clutch of independent countries which compete – oftentimes furiously. That would be problematic enough if the provinces shared a common demographic base. That, they do not.
…
Functionally, that restricts economic dynamism to the demographically young provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan, a pair of entities whose economies depend upon old-school oil and natural gas production. For years now, funds transfers from the pair – quintuply so from Alberta – to the center is what has enabled Canada to enjoy its much-lauded social welfare state.
That’s not the end of the story, but instead just the beginning.
…
First, it has steadily centralized power in Ottawa, making it easier to drain cash from Alberta and Saskatchewan both to balance out the slipping economic performance of the rest of the country, and to push this or that pet policy. Second, the pet policy of the moment is a fairly aggressive environmental program that has proven popular with Justin Trudeau’s base. That program has put ever-more-stringent restrictions on the economies of Alberta and Saskatchewan – specifically on the sectors that make the Canadian national budget possible.
…
Political sentiment in Alberta and Saskatchewan turned sharply anti-Green and anti-Trudeau years ago. The Albertans and Saskatchewanians assert the Greens, the NDP and the Trudeau government are actively conspiring to stymie any and all efforts to get Albertan and Saskatchewan energy exports to the wider world. The Greens and NDP openly say they do, with anti-Albertan policies in the one province they control – British Colombia – having reached the point that BC and Alberta have a hot little inter-provincial trade war going. The Trudeau government attempts to be at least a bit circumspect on the issue, but under Justin Trudeau’s rule construction has yet to begin on a single cross-province pipeline.
Legally, there is an excruciatingly painful route forward. Quebec’s on-again, off-again independence spasms firmly established that Canadian provinces have the right to leave Canada. Paths to secession have been approved – at least in theory – by both the Canadian parliament and the Canadian Supreme Court. We are approaching the witching hour.

This article was eye-opening to me. If it is remotely accurate, it explains a lot – why Canada has become such a bitch to US foreign policy, for example.
I have no idea about Zeihan’s warning of Canadian oil provinces seceding though.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 9 2022 14:09 utc | 319

Posted by: Antonym | Feb 9 2022 6:31 utc | 312
Here a Youtube from a well known 4x American MD working in California who is quite upbeat about direct sunlight (not pills) against any viral infections: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Zzo4SJopcY
____________________________________________________________________
The main take away from this video should be that severe covid and covid death is linked to high levels of oxidative stress. Numerous studies from around the world have shown that people who have strong capability to fight oxidative stress don’t get severe covid or die. The human body has many pathways for countering oxidative stress. Glutathione, vitamin D, Ace2 and melatonin and other anti-oxidants contribute to countering oxidative stress. Glutathione is probably the most important anti-oxidant and studies show that low Glutathione predict poor covid outcomes.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7263077/
Here’s the kicker – the only drug that health authorities recammend people self administer for covid is acetaminophen(paracetamol). There have been no studies showing the safety or efficacy of acetametophen for early treatment of covid. In fact, there have been studies showing the opposite. Taking acetaminophen depletes glutathione and vitamin D. And worse than that it reduces fever. fever is part of the bodies immune defense against covid.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphar.2020.625295/full

Posted by: jinn | Feb 9 2022 14:53 utc | 321

@oldhippie #322
The Russian nuclear engineer I knew in Tokyo was educated in a nuclear industry which saw the building of nuclear reactors and evolution of nuclear reactor technology, more or less continuously, since the first nuclear reactor was built in Russia in 1951.
The 1990s – there were no new nuclear reactor starts but several late 1980s projects were kept alive and completed in the early 2000s.
From the 2000s on, Russia has completed 12 nuclear reactors and started work on 4 more, with another 12 planned for starts in the next 5 years. This on top of the 14 or 15 which Russian firms have contracted with other nations to build (built or in process). Note Russia has 38 operating nuclear plants, so they very much are updating their nuclear plants.
This person was in Japan to help with the ramp up of a liquid sodium reactor. Ironically, it was right around that time that a nuclear accident occurred when 2 Japanese nuclear technicians decided to take a shortcut and put quadruple loads of fuel into a bucket – thus achieving critical mass.
In any case, the point is that the present state and past history of nuclear power development in the United States is obviously radically different than in Russia.
It seems likely that China will be leveraging at least some of this Russian expertise with their announced plan to build 150 new nuclear plants in the next 15 years, although China does have a significant number of nuclear plants already.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 9 2022 15:10 utc | 323

@ retiredmecheng | Feb 9 2022 1:52 utc | 311

Again, those who bet against scientific consensus (especially mature ones such as that on climate change) tend to lose in the long term. In this case, we will all lose, and I am very sorry for that.

There is no such thing as “scientific consensus”, science is not decided by counting hands. “Consensus” is a political term. Your arguments are political, not scientific. Science is about formulating hypotheses and trying to falsify them via experiments or observations.
The Key to Science

Posted by: Norwegian | Feb 9 2022 15:29 utc | 325

@Bemildred #326
You said

Mostly I like what he reveals about US “elites” thinking process

Indeed – the articles are from 2019, and the author used to work for Stratfor.
I looked at the rest of his series – his predictions were WAY off in any number of areas but accurate in others. In general, European/UK were reasonably good but his views on China and Japan are…let’s just say not well supported by the unfolding of actual events since 2019 to present.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 9 2022 16:19 utc | 327

Quantum computing not breaking cryptography anytime soon
Breaking 245 bit elliptic encryption with a quantum computer on schneieronsecurity.com

It would require 317 × 106 physical qubits to break the encryption within one hour using the surface code, a code cycle time of 1 μs, a reaction time of 10 μs, and a physical gate error of 10-3. To instead break the encryption within one day, it would require 13 × 106 physical qubits.

Tens to hundreds of millions of Qubits. The biggest quantum computer now is like 127 qubits and we don’t even have computers that perform in the 1000 bit architecture.
So not happening anytime soon.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 9 2022 17:28 utc | 329

@everyone
Thanks everyone for your comments on my posts! There is nothing more devastating than waking up in the morning, going into Moon mode, and seeing empty space. And for those of us that frequent this blog, we pretty much all have “controversial” viewpoints on many subjects, that go against the grain. Being called “full of shit”, and having people question our technical competence and our sanity, goes with the territory. I actually find it very stimulating. Bring it on!
So, along those lines, and in no particular order:
@Norwegian | Feb 9 2022 15:29 utc | 325
You say “Science is about formulating hypotheses and trying to falsify them via experiments or observations.” Totally agree. And I don’t want to derail this thread, but was it you that believes mini-nukes and directed energy weapons brought down 3 steel framed towers on 9/11, 20 years ago? Waiting for your experiments and observations to back up that claim. You really seem to have that scientific method nailed down. But do us a favor – hold your experiments and observations in reserve until the upcoming Sept. 11th (hopefully b will allow us to have that discussion then), or we both might get banned.
@c1ue:
I think on one of your posts you even acknowledged that “the climate is changing”. Good progress. Well done. Now here’s a little experiment that even a semi-conductor guy (and part time climate change authority) can do. Find a plausible scientific explanation for that change. You can define “plausible”. Post it in a comment, and let others have a crack at it. See how credible it is.
Posted by: psychohistorian | Feb 9 2022 6:36 utc | 313
I think it is okay to be cautious about mRNA vaccines. I was/am. I think the conventional vaccine technology has proven to be just as effective. But I am definitely not an expert, and would never profess to be one. And yes big pharma definitely has their share of ulterior motives. But that doesn’t mean that every drug invented has no benefit. And as far as authorities relaxing restrictions worldwide, yes of course it is happening. People are fed up the pandemic and with the restrictions. And there is a chance, if you believe what the medical scientific community is telling us, that we will be in a much worse world of hurt a few months from now. Denial, followed by anger…, where have we seen that before…

Posted by: retiredmecheng | Feb 9 2022 18:00 utc | 331

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 9 2022 18:34 utc | 332
Hey mister rebel without a c1ue. You are the one challenging widely accepted science. Every year I see the sea level rise. I see the tendency for the seasonal temperatures to be warmer. I see more (a lot more) extreme weather events, including those that impact my neighbours. I see more frequent and intense wildfires. I see the glaciers melting on the mountains visible from my back yard. I have read that the ice sheets in Antarctica are melting (slowly by consistently). And yes, I have read that the climate has changed before, but not nearly as quickly as it is changing now. So those are my personal observations. Hence, my curiosity, I ask – what could be causing this? And yes, I ask those that believe in the scientific method. And yes, I don’t like the answer, but I accept it.
Now if you look at what I have personally observed and concluded, and compare it with your thought process, massive failure is far too kind a word.
And for the record, being an engineer or not, has nothing to do with it. What is required is the capability for rational independent thought. Something that you seem to be struggling with.

Posted by: retiredmecheng | Feb 9 2022 18:58 utc | 333

@William Gruff | Feb 8 2022 21:39 utc | 306
China is building a test thorium reactor. If successful, a commercial one will be built by 2030.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02459-w

Posted by: Cindy6 | Feb 9 2022 20:38 utc | 335

@retiredmecheng #333
I always laugh when people try to taunt me using my username. It shows an amazing lack of originality and is even more funny because that isn’t why I use it.
As for your other comments:
sea level rise: wow, you must have amazingly accurate eyes. Sea level rise has been in the 2 to 3 millimeter rate since the turn of the 20th century.
You can see the 2 to 3 millimeter difference per year vs. the multiple feet difference just from the tides? Yeah right.
Equally: glaciers and wildfires – I have already debunked your nonsense using IPCC – the very bible of the catastrophic global warming movement. The reality is far more prosaic:
Glaciers: warming – which is at least partly due to LIA recovery – is going to cause glacier melt…but a lot of those glaciers were formed by the runup to the LIA. People were skating on the Thames in Charles Dickens’ time; Valley Forge was so cold because it was almost literally the nadir of the LIA.
Wildfires: more a factor of both people moving into forests – forests which have regenerated now that we don’t burn wood as a primary fuel anymore.
Anyway, I am highly amused that your amazingly accurate “senses” are able to determine trends which even the IPCC bible finds difficult to substantiate.
You are clearly no kind of scientist or engineer – merely a follower of a view which conforms to your prejudices.
You haven’t even bothered to read the science which you believe the consensus supports.
Your so-called defense of the consensus has been quite entertaining – simultaneously unoriginal, out of date and amazingly uninformed. All you have been able to muster is: it is the consensus! And your senses seeing things which clearly are your imagination.
But let’s examine the consensus:
You have yourself stated that you are cautious about mRNA vaccines.
Why so? The consensus is that they are safe and perfectly fine for you. So are you a denier? An Anti-Vaxxer(tm)?
The “consensus” has also been fluctuating back and forth on all manner of COVID related things: lockdowns good, lockdown not good. Masks good, masks not good. Vaccines prevent getting COVID, vaccines don’t prevent getting COVID. “I am science” Fauci has been at the forefront of ALL of these.
All you have accomplished thus far is to utterly destroy your own credibility.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 10 2022 18:08 utc | 337

@retiredmecheng #338
I’m not the one selling anything – nor am I the one who has demonstrated zero personal credibility.
All you have been able to muster is “consensus”.
Consensus is wrong ALL THE DAMN TIME. Norway dude is completely correct that science is never a function of consensus – it is a function of theory validated by many and varied experimental tests. Climate science has none of this – it has demonstrated no skill in prediction, it has demonstrated academic misbehavior is deliberately skewing outcomes and it has demonstrated ethical breaches in open advocacy for not just policy – which science has no role in – but in scientific certainty for which there is none whatsoever in climate science.
But hey, keep on the ad hominem attacks.
Surely those make you feel better in spite of your own obvious incompetence in matters of science and engineering.
It is glaringly obvious now that you are one of those that teach (and preach) because they cannot do.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 13 2022 15:42 utc | 339