Author: Captain Obvious

A recent blog about the fact that size matters points out the scale issues being called for as the world moves to reduce carbon emissions.  That is clearly one dimension to the problem.  But, there is a more pressing question right now.  Read this article to understand the background for this blog. 

Why in this country at least are we considering such large EVs on the roads along so many and much smaller vehicles?  Have we forgotten the most fundamental law of physics that for every action there is an equal but opposite reaction.  This is the central issue when playing pool or billiards.  We all have seen those swinging balls where the number of balls that react is exactly the same as the number you swing.

The latest version of the Hummer EV weighs in at about 9,000 pounds.  It is only a matter of time before it hits the typical car weighing about one third of that.  It is going to send that smaller car flying!

Why, in this age of environmental sensitivities are we offering ideas that are simply wrong headed?  Oh … I forgot, if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.  If you are Hummer, the answer is an all-electric Hummer.  We are willing to ban all internal combustion engines (ICEs), but we are not willing to ban cars that have no place on the road?

Your reaction to this will certainly avoid some middle ground position.  After all, we are not really willing to have a full debate here.  Free market types will simply say that this involves the freedom of choice, and I agree.  Then why are we reducing the freedom of choice with the ICE?  Another position might be that we should tax “overweight” EVs to reflect their societal costs.  Then why aren’t we willing to tax the future sale of ICEs and let customers decide?

You can’t have it both ways.  We are either going to let a free market work, or we are going to attempt to control markets with regulations.

There is no question that size matters.  To me, the biggest question we are trusting others to answer is the size of government.  That is at the root of all of this mess.

 

We hear this phrase a lot in all sorts of contexts, but I want to introduce one you possibly missed.  We all know that scientific research has long been funded by all of us through the Federal budget.  That includes the obvious “D” agencies such as the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of Energy (DOE), along with a host of national energy agencies such as NREL, LBL, etc.  The typical individual program sizes has been authorized in the millions, except of course the DOD where large budgets prevail for obvious reasons.

The energy industry has now sensed the opportunity to equivalence the energy questions in the same light as an existential threat to the planet, so why not increase the “punch bowls” out of which all the energy consultants suck from millions to billions.  You do remember the Inflation Reduction Act authorized hundreds of billions in the energy research areas, as if that was somehow going to reduce inflation.  The logic eludes me because all it in fact has done is to increase the costs of the supposedly renewable portfolios by pushing demand up for critically short constituent materials like rare earth elements and thereby drastically increase supply costs.

The good news in this country is that we, as a nation, have drastically reduced our environmental footprint and historically driven down prices for renewable sources.  Why hasn’t anyone looked at the certain results when you pour money into markets that do not scale economically any longer and drive up the devastation and human suffering in parts of the world that supply our EV and PV options?

Increases in budgets that move from millions to billions do the obvious.  Spending one HUNDRED times more than in the past always results ins shortages.  We will immediately see the need for drastically more people in these agencies and lots of luck finding qualified candidates.  So, couple this with the idea that testing is no longer fair and the DEI priorities you have a powder keg of organizational challenges.  It took decades of hard work to build the consulting and research capabilities … decades.  Now the idealistic politicians believe you can increase spending by two factors of ten and have productive environments and the quality controls to be sure of results.

Size matters.  There is such a thing as sustainable growth.  Every business school trains their execs that you can “strip out the gears” of any organization with growth.  All of the biggest failures in business are caused by unstainable growth.  Anyone who tries to attain more than 20-30% per year of growth knows you strip gears.

How many years does it take to grow a $10 million organization to a billion?  It takes at least 14 years to do that.  That means it would be the year 2037 to grow a business like that.  Have you heard anyone talk about whether they can do something like this?  And if not, why not?

Follow the money.  Ask better questions.

 

We Americans cherish this right and will defend it to our death.  But, I am wondering whether we should rethink this freedom.  Are we free to speak hatefully?  Are we free to let people mock each other?  Isn’t this a form of bullying?  Where is that age-old idea of grace and acceptance?

If you check out the detail here in this part of our Constitution you will see that the freedom of speech and expression is not absolute.  There are common limitations or boundaries to freedom of speech that relate to libel, slander, obscenity, pornography, sedition, incitement, fighting words, hate speech, classified information, copyright violation, trade secrets, food labeling, non-disclosure agreements, privacy, dignity, public security, and perjury.

The central idea here is that we are free to speak our mind, but not free to harm others with this freedom.  After all, where is civility and deference?  And how can we listen when we are trying to hurt another person?

Deference is an interesting word.  It means evidencing humility and respect.  Yep, that is certainly at the root of it all, and is conspicuously missing from today’s dialogues for sure.  The key idea expressed in the Old Testament that sums up our relationships is to walk humbly and seek mercy.  (Micah 6:8)

The key principle to me is that we have the freedom TO speak, but should be warned that this freedom comes with the responsibility to do no harm.  We all must realize the power of words to hurt people and permanently damage relationships.  There are consequences to hateful speech that deteriorate society and discourage others from redeeming efforts with their own lives.

A recent article in the Wall Street Journal, says it all as it takes a closer look at antisemitism.  Plus recent actions by Disney emphasize the same principles.

We are free to speak but not free to be hurtful.

We live in the presence of a rare breed of an individual and will soon see whether this firebrand for innovation flames out or continues to produce fundamental change in our world.  I used to think of Steve Jobs this way, but Elon Musk sets the bar much higher targeting space travel, transportation, and now social media.

When I took my master’s in management the key ideas were to focus or fail.  Trying to do too many things was considered the foundational mistake most people make: focus, focus, FOCUS!

Elon is the antithesis of this and stands in stark contrast to the management styles I was taught.  He seems ruthless and undisciplined.  He may be brilliant, but his actions seem so stupid at times.

TESLA may be a casualty of all this.  The stock price seems to reflect that.  But, I have watched him for so many years rise from the ashes of a situation that it could just be another magician’s trick … distract everyone with your movements here while the real action is there.

This next year is very likely to prove him right or wrong.  My heart of hearts wants him to be right once again and release a new generation of recyclable and sustainable batteries for EVs.  I have a TESLA Model S which I love but will put my order in for one of these new ones just as soon as I can.  And, I will not sell my S … I love it too much and will just keep it around as a spare.  In fact, I decided to replace the rims so it will once again look brand new.

My management training makes me want to criticize Elon for not finding a suitable mate.  When I see his rants and wanderings I am reminded how lucky I am to have a stabilizing wise mate in my life who keeps me out of ditches … at least most of the time. 😊

What I and others find refreshing about Elon is his zeal for change.  He does not settle for small incremental change … he literally shoots for the moon.  He also keeps a smile on his face and avoids the rancorously negative tone of people like Greta Thunberg.  She is just tiring.

Most of the world wants to follow leaders like Elon.  We look for handsome charismatic and seemingly successful change heroes who taunt and drive innovation into realities we never imagined.  Every time I drive my Model S I am amazed and how well it works.  Well done!

However, with all that said, there are times when you have to slow down and regroup IMHO.  Yes, I may sound like a luddite to some, but the innovation race is not a sprint, it is a marathon.

Wikipedia describes the Essenes as a mystic Jewish sect that flourished from the 2nd century BCE to the 1st century CE. The Jewish historian Josephus records that Essenes existed in large numbers but fewer in number than the Pharisees and the Sadducees, the other two major sects at the time.

The Essenes lived in various cities but congregated in communal life dedicated to voluntary poverty, daily immersion, and asceticism (their priestly class practiced celibacy). The most famous one you probably know was John the Baptist who reportedly ate locusts and wild honey.  We don’t know what else he ate.  I would doubt this is all he ate, but he was known for being different by eating these.

It is interesting to me that we seem poised to consider doing the same these days.  First of all, it is now a well-known fact that honey is an amazingly powerful food.  And bees are essential for our plants’ survival due to their role as pollinators.  Of course, insects are a key part of the diet in many parts of the world, in some cases even a delicacy. But here in the West, most cringe at the thought.

We seem to think we have risen to a higher standard of living because we can eat beef, lamb, lobster, etc.  The idea of a cricket appetizer is just not likely to appear on any American restaurant menu.

Yet, the health benefits are undeniable.  The ecological impacts are all beneficial.  And, think of the devastation locusts produce if we don’t keep their populations under control.  Plus, you simple dry them before consumption to store them and you can keep them for years without refrigeration.

No one I know eats ants or termites, but our ancestors probably did.  Genetics tells us we and primates have common ancestors if you go back far enough and primates do consider ants and termites a delightful snack.  Some animals consider ants as their primary food source.

Now, don’t get me wrong.  I am not about to go buy cricket flower but you can and it gets great reviews:  Cricket Protein Powder

But, if we are serious about a sustainable planet, why are we so afraid of new ideas that can wean us off our predisposition to eat the way we do now?  Think of all the damage locusts do if we don’t harvest them?  Plus, you do know that termites are a significant source of methane pollution … much higher than all those belching cows.  You detect termites in the walls using a methane sniffer!

Yes, I am playing with you to some extent, but not completely.  What are we afraid of?

By the way, people who do think about this and have lots of money are betting on this: Emerging Tech Research Food Tech Review 

So, what is our problem?  You do remember the prison revolt in Maine … at the time no one believed you could eat lobsters. When there was a food shortage at the prison, they served lobster resulting in a riot.  The prisoners thought they were trying to kill them.  When I grew up nobody ate mussels. Maybe with the passage of time, appetites will evolve to more sustainable food sources.