Caught in the enemy's web of thought

How an opponent of the self-destructive philosophy of limitism becomes so entangled in the enemy's network of thought that he argues like a fundamentalist of limitism.






How does a spider catch a fly? The spider spins a web and if the fly flies into this web, it is lost. In this case, limitism, the self-destructive philosophy founded in the book "The Limits to Growth", is the spider and a declared enemy of this self-destructive philosophy is the fly.

My last newsletter was about costs: Energy imports and domestic value creation. Deliberately not a single word about the environment and climate. After the disastrous policies of the German Greens in the name of the environment and climate, this topic has negative connotations for many. Fortunately, when it comes to electric cars or combustion engines, you can completely dispense with the environment and climate and argue solely on the basis of the cost advantage, as I showed in my last newsletter.

To my utter surprise, I then received an e-mail from a reader of this newsletter who completely dispensed with the topic of cost benefits and argued only with the arguments of limitism. No, this e-mail was not from a green fundamentalist, but from the opposite side.

  Parallel currency footprint


There are countless footprint calculators that have one thing in common: Pretending that there is no solution. The production of new goods can only ever take place with considerable CO2 emissions. I have already written several times about this perfidious approach, here are the 2 most important ones: To the author of the letter to the editor: he is a well-educated anti-limitist in a high position, but he has become so entangled in his enemy's network of thought, limitism, that he is trapped in the enemy's network of thought.

  Outdated studies


Reader's letter: The emission savings for electric cars in particular are a milquetoast calculation.

Had such discussions 20 years ago on the subject of photovoltaics. At the Technical Museum in Munich, I visited the solar cells of the first satellites. They were small, very thick and produced on a laboratory scale. They started at US$ 70 per watt peak. Today they are US$ 0.14 per watt peak. The price reduction has something to do with the improvement in production technology.

A general formula for this is that the price of a growing industry falls by 20% for every doubling of the world market. The first prime example of this was the oil industry from 1859 to 1893.

How great this formula works, at the beginning of the 90s photovoltaics was at US$ 7 per watt peak. Since then, global production has doubled 13 times. 0.8 to the power of 13 * 7 = US$ 0.38. Wow, the photovoltaic industry has even managed -26% per doubling of the global market.

Lithium batteries were US$ 1500 per kWh 20 years ago. Currently at US$ 66 per kWh. With sodium batteries, much lower prices will be achieved in a few years' time.

This study mentions 37.5 kWh for the production of 1 kWh of lithium iron phosphate batteries. If not specifically stated, this usually refers to thermal energy. With the 60 kWh in my Tesla Y SR RWD LFP, this would be 2,250 kWh. Let's divide this up over 300,000 km, 7.5 Wh per km, 0.75 kWh per 100 km. Quite minimalist compared to the effort required by a refinery to produce petrol, diesel and other products from crude oil. The plant technology specialist Alfa Laval states that 6% to 8% of the world's energy requirements are generated in crude oil refineries.

Petrol and diesel are simply exhaust gas after a single use, but the LFP battery can continue to serve in a stationary application for many more years after 300,000 km. Then it can be recycled to make an even better battery after decades of technical progress.

  Lack of research


Reader's letter: The fact is that the backpack of emissions is considerably higher when building an electric car due to the higher energy input required to extract the raw materials for the battery. Or perhaps you think the dump trucks in the lithium mines in South America and other mines are electric vehicles. You won't be that naive?

Before so boldly accusing the author of naivety, a question to Google would have helped a lot: So the changeover is in full swing. For a limitist, it's the biggest nightmare when everything is produced with solar power, because then everyone will see that their footprint calculator is complete nonsense. That can't be, that mustn't be! It's best not to look at it and just indulge in the memories where every production had a lot of CO2 emissions and you could shout at everyone: "The footprint!".

But here an anti-limitist has adopted this way of thinking because he was too caught up in the enemy's network of thought.

  Trump cuts 300 billion for renewable energy


Thirty years ago, photovoltaics was still very expensive and only profitable in a few niche applications. At that time, photovoltaics relied on subsidies to achieve price reductions by increasing production. This start-up subsidy developed into a "we have to do this, whatever the cost" mentality. Take grid expansion, for example. Nobody thinks you can drastically reduce grid expansion costs with local batteries. Oh, I've been doing this for years? Unfortunately, I have to consider myself a nobody.

New power plants have to be elaborately designed for rapid load changes. Why is this necessary? Batteries enable smooth operation. With the battery prices of 2030, there is nothing more superfluous than designing thermal power plants for rapid load changes.

The result is a negative cost-optimized energy transition. Collecting money from taxpayers in a swamp of subsidies. In Germany, for example, the difference between the hourly spot market price and the EEG feed-in tariff is imposed on the taxpayer. Why should we care about cost optimization as long as the cash cow is churning out ducats at the back end?

Let's take a look at a tender in China for 16 GWh of electricity storage:

Quote: Power China receives bids for 16 gigawatt hours in storage tender with average price of 66.3 US dollars per kilowatt hour (end of quote)

That's how prices would be if political and business networks didn't create a paradise for rip-off artists! Trump is doing exactly the right thing here: draining the swamps of subsidies. The prices in China show what the free market economy can achieve.

To quote Staberl again: "Capitalism is good for the consumer because so many greedy capitalists want to capture market share with cheaper and better products.

  The net-zero emissions mentality


Net zero emissions means reducing greenhouse gas emissions to a level that nature can supposedly absorb for a long time. For the rich, this means Maintain poverty, cause poverty, so that enough emission rights remain for the rich. See the architect and her opinion that Africans don't need roads.

  The planetary restoration mentality


Planetary cleanup back to 350 ppm CO2 means around 47,000 TWh of electricity to filter 1 ppm CO2 from the atmosphere and recycle it into carbon and oxygen. Who can afford that? Only a rich human race, 10 billion people in prosperity can do it. One million km² of energy-optimized settlement areas alone should contribute 150,000 TWh for the necessary electricity for world-wide prosperity and planetary restoration.

  GEMINI next Generation AG will prove the contrary


It's not about whether the shares will be worth 10 times or 100 times more in 20 years' time or whether they will only be worth a few cents. It's about the future of us all. Will there be a big showdown between eco-fascism and yesterday's fossils, or will it be possible to overcome the deep divisions in society and inspire supporters of both sides to work towards a great new goal?

Global prosperity and planetary restoration instead of saving, restricting, renouncing and climate catastrophe or peak oil and a little more climate catastrophe. Both sides must be convinced that they have no solution that is even remotely viable.

On the one hand, it must be shown that net-zero emissions are a completely inadequate target and that the goal must instead be a planetary clean-up back to 350 ppm CO2. The other side must be shown that solar power enables a higher standard of living than fossil energy.

It's about survival! The social situation in 2024 compared to 2004. Extrapolating that to 2044 makes for a horror world! If we are successful and your shares are worth 100 times more, this is just an addition to all the other achievements.

One new shareholder said, "Me with my very modest investment", but €4,000 times €1,000 is also €4 million for all investments up to the opening of the settlement in Unken as a starting point for global expansion.

There is a reward program for recommending the share to others. Two of the new shareholders have become shareholders through this reward program.

Here are the details.

  GEMINI shares: time to buy


My studies on off-grid fast-charging settlements have already resulted in initial contact and a video conference with the CEO of a major African company. The most important statements: "There are about 2 million homes missing" and "Solar-powered cement factories are a fascinating new idea".

Initial negotiations have been held with two financing platforms.

There are several chances of an event that could lead to a jump in the share price. At today's share price, € 2 million would be 10,000 packages at € 200 and 300,000 shares for the buyer. However, if these € 2 million are only worth 20% of the AG, this would logically result in a very significant jump in the share price.
          Caught in the enemy's web of thought: How an opponent of the self-destructive philosophy of limitism becomes so entangled in the enemy's network of thought that he argues like a fundamentalist of limitism. https://2025.pege.org/01-26/