A couple of weeks ago, her parents asked if Sophia could be moved from the 18-month-old to 3-year-old soccer training group to the "4-year-old" group. Sophia is 2 years and 7 months old. After the first week it was noted that what Sophia lacked in skill was made up in her ability to listen and take instruction.
Today, her third week, of the ten players in her group, she probably ranks #1 for enthusiasm and paying attention to the coach. She probably ranks #4 in skills and "understanding" of the game. A third girl was added to the group today -- a 3 1/2 year old. There is a 4-year-old boy who is clearly the best of the group, and then after that, I think the three girls are better than or equal to any of the other boys. There is one 3 1/2 year-old boy that is less impressive, but even so, I was amazed how quickly this group understood scrimmaging.
Today, for the first time, four players plus a goalie on each team, in their purple and orange pinnies, scrimmaged. They actually knew which goal to go to.
My wife happened to have her smart phone; from a distance it's a bit fuzzy, but you get the idea.
Finally, the global warming scam is getting the attention it deserves. From The [London] Daily Mail: exposed -- how world leaders were duped into investing billions over manipulated global warming data. It may not quite be "mainstream media" but the story is moving in that direction.
The Mail on Sunday can reveal a landmark paper exaggerated global warming
it was rushed through and timed to influence the Paris agreement on climate change
America’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) broke its own rules
the report claimed the pause in global warming never existed, but it was based on misleading, ‘unverified’ data
From the article:
The scandal has disturbing echoes of the ‘Climategate’ affair which broke shortly before the UN climate summit in 2009, when the leak of thousands of emails between climate scientists suggested they had manipulated and hidden data. Some were British experts at the influential Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia.
NOAA’s 2015 ‘Pausebuster’ paper was based on two new temperature sets of data – one containing measurements of temperatures at the planet’s surface on land, the other at the surface of the seas.
Both datasets were flawed. This newspaper has learnt that NOAA has now decided that the sea dataset will have to be replaced and substantially revised just 18 months after it was issued, because it used unreliable methods which overstated the speed of warming. The revised data will show both lower temperatures and a slower rate in the recent warming trend.
******************************************
The End Of Germany's Energy Transition To Green Energy Energiewende: Energy Transition
fifty to 150 wind turbines on a "farm" that feeds into a network
150 x 3 = 450 MW
450 MW = 0.45 gigawatts
50 gigawatts / 0.45 gigawatts = 110 more wind farms of "max size" needed in Germany to offset loss of nuclear power
in Germany, because wind is not dispatchable, for every 10 MW of wind energy added to the grid, at least 8 MW of back-up power (coal, natural gas) must be dedicated to back-up wind energy
The fact that Germany is/will be 50 MW short of energy is an incredibly "bullish" data point for America's cheap energy and all the industry it will attract. It turns out that Germany's "miracle economy" to great extent was built on a cheap Deutsche Mark (now called a Euro) due to currency issues in Greece, Italy, and the Balkans that are part of the Eurozone. The US has caught on to this "inconvenient truth."
2016 was a good year for coral surprizes. Until recently no one even
knew that corals could grow just out from the river-mouth of the
Amazon. Then 9,300 square kilometers of reef was found living in a region no one thought corals could grow.
Volunteers found very nice reefs in Morton Bay, not far from the
ferry route, but entirely “unexpected” and “better than tourist sites”.
Researchers also found another 4.000 square kilometers of reef off
Queensland, hidden under 20m of water.
In every media article the corals were immediately called into action
against mining, farming, stuff like that. Journalists talk to
scientists and head straight over to Greenpeace.
The poor corals are
politicized before they’d even been put on a tourist map.
Somehow scientists that are wrong are always described as surprised,
excited or astonished. Other professions dream that their errors would
be recounted this way. (Think –tax accountants, pilots, politicians…).
In terms of hard questions from the media, the only group that gets it
easier than Hillary Clinton are scientists. Not that I’m saying they
should have known, but the same profession that talks about 97%
certainty can’t also get a free run every time their assumptions are
100% wrong. The corals discovered near the Amazon might be quite
important. The journalists describe the zone as having a”unique pH”,
which is a funny way to say that it was almost certainly a lower
pH (because rivers are naturally low). Why hide that – it might show
that corals aren’t under as much threat from “acidification” as some
people want you to think.
I guess like Mark Twain and polar bears, the death of coral reefs was "greatly exaggerated."
******************************************
The History Page Or The "High Life" Page
The link to the Foreign Affairs article below was through an op-ed over at The New York Times: "the peculiar populism of Donald Trump." Nothing peculiar about it at all. What amazes me is that billionaires who had no political ambition at all had finally had enough. With their billions, like professional hedge fund founders and professional athletes they could have remained on the sidelines, living the "High Life," but they chose to stop the insanity.
From Foreign Affairs, "The Jacksonian Revolt: American Populism and the Liberal Order," Walter Russell Mead, January 20, 2017.
Recommended by a reader; much appreciated. Most of the following, even without quotes, is taken from the original. Much, more more at the linked article. A very, very good article.
Author begins: "For the first time in 70 years, the American people have elected a president who disparages the policies, ideas, and institutions at the heart of postwar US foreign policy:
70 years ago: 1948 election / 1949 inauguration of Harry S Truman (defeated Thomas E Dewey and Strom Thurmond)
Wilsonians: creation of a global liberal order a vital US interest; conceived it in terms of values rather than economics; in the later stages of the Cold War, one branch of this camp, liberal institutionalists, focused on the promotion of international institutions and ever-closer global integration, while another branch, neoconservatives, believed that a liberal agenda could best be advanced thorugh Washington's unilateral efforts (or in voluntary conjunction with like-minded partners).
Jeffersonian and Jacksonian schools of thought, prominent before WWII but out of favor during the heyday of the liberal order, have come back with a vengeance.
Jeffersonians: includes toay's so-called realists, argue that reducing the United States' global profile would reduce the costs and risks of foreign policy; they seek to define US interests narrowly and advance them in the safest and most economical ways
Libertarians take the proposition to its limits and find allies among many on the left who oppose interventionism, want to cut military spending, and favor redeploying the govt's resources and efforts at home (think senators Paul Rand [KY] and Ted Cruz [TX]) -- the latter both thought they could surf the rising tide of Jeffersonian thinking during the Republican presidential primary
Trump: sensed something different that his political rivals failed to grasp -- that the truly surging force in American politics wasn't Jeffersonian minimalism, it was Jacksonian populist nationalism
Jacksonians: the role of the US govt is to fulfill the country's destinty by looking after the physical security and economic well-being of the American people in their national home --and to do that while interfering as little as possible with the individual freedom that make the country unique
Jacksonians: only intermittently concerned with foreign policy; only intermittently engaged with politics more generally
Jacksonians:
galvanized by external attacks on the US; attacks internal enemies (elite cabals or immigrants from different backgrounds)
not particularly obsessed with corruption, seeing it as an ineradicable part of politics
but deeply obsessed with "perversion" -- when politicians try to use the government to oppress the people rather than protect them
patriotism: defined as an instinctive loyalty to the well-being and values of Jacksonian America
distrust of elite patriotism has been increased by the country's selective embrace of identity politics in recent decades
The writer discusses:
the Black Lives Matter movement
Jacksonian support for the police, military
gun control -- may be the "biggest" issue for Jacksonians
immigration -- it's much more than just a walleb/pocketbook issue
Note: the right to bear arms plays a unique and hallowed role in Jacksonian political culture, and many Jacksonians consider the Second Amendment to be the most important in the Constitution
International trade: it's all about trusting their national leader; to paraphrase neoconservative intellectual Irving Kristol writing about Senator Joseph McCarthy in 1952, there is one thing that Jacksonians know about Trump -- that he is unequivocally on their side
The new world order: identity politics can no longer be denied.
Gasoline demand: after talking about this for the past few weeks, the story is finally getting national press. I have noted the drop in gasoline demand on several occasions; this might be the most recent and one of the better posts. From the first tweet from Reuters that I saw this morning: US refiners face weakening demand at pump for first time in five years.
U.S. refiners are
facing the prospects of weakening gasoline demand for the first time in
five years, stoking fears that earnings this year may be even worse
than the dismal performances seen in 2016.
The
sign of weakening U.S. gasoline demand comes as U.S. refiners are in
the midst of reporting their worst year of earnings since the U.S. shale
boom started in 2011. The oil boom turned to bust in 2014, and U.S.
independent refiners reaped the profits as plunging pump prices and a
growing economy helped fuel a surge in demand.
U.S.
refiners amassed large inventories that punished margins last year, but
record gasoline demand and robust exports helped provided a firewall
against further slippage. Now the industry faces the prospects of higher
crude prices following global production cuts and fresh federal data
that suggests their gasoline demand safety net may be eroding.
Other data points from the article:
gasoline use has grown every year since 2012
MPC, PSX, and VLO execs all acknowledged weaker-than-expected seasonal volume in earnings calls this past week; all anticipated strong demand to return
crude runs, meanwhile, are at historic levels, up roughly 300,000 bpd over last year
refiners must sell off winter-grade gasoline; thus, inventories are not likely to linger
So, we have acknowledgement that gasoline demand is down, but no explanation why.
This is what I posted February 2, 2017, (linked above):
********************************
Gasoline Demand -- A Most Under-Reported Story
Comments later; two graphics:
Another reader is also stymied, noting:
I first looked at it last night, and couldn't decide what it meant, and
have no further conclusions this morning.
Only 4 years of the last 18 years
have a 3 week period where it's been so low: 2000, 2007, 2012, and 2014.
Meanwhile, from John Kemp via Twitter, gasoline stocks rising faster than ever:
A reader alerted me to this well, for various reasons:
25093, 745, EOG, Wayzetta 150-1509H, Parshall, 52 stages, 14.3 million lbs, t8/13; cum 662K 12/16; just an incredible well, still producing about 6,000 bbls of oil per month, along with 12,000 MCF natural gas / month (2,000 boe). Who wudda guessed that a non-descript middle Bakken well would have produced over 600,000 bbls in just 3.5 years? And as as early as 2013, EOG was using 14 million lbs of sand, and 50+ stages. Truly amazing.
That's a "baby well," only three or four years old.
Now an oldie, a "senior well," celebrating its 60th year; fracked 53 years ago:
1509, 248, CLR, Kate Hopkins 1, Antelope field, target, the Sanish oil pool; t12/57; cum 594K 12/16; this well was drilled in 1957. Then in 1964, a sundry form reported the operator planned to "fracture this well using 10,000 gallons of gelled water and 3,000 pounds of glass beads." (The original intent was to use 3,000 pounds of glass beads; but the work report said that 10,000 pounds of glass beads were used.)
So, there you have it, they've been "fracking the Bakken" since at least 1964.
I've been following this well almost from the beginning of the blog. A few years ago I noted (and blogged) that production was dropping more and more every month, down to less than 20 bbls/month.
Now all of a sudden, a noticeable increase; no sundry form in the file report to suggest why.
Recent production profile: Monthly Production Data:
Pool
Date
Days
BBLS Oil
Runs
BBLS Water
MCF Prod
MCF Sold
Vent/Flare
SANISH
12-2016
22
200
0
0
310
0
228
SANISH
11-2016
30
310
386
0
457
0
328
SANISH
10-2016
31
289
209
0
399
0
285
SANISH
9-2016
3
0
0
0
9
0
9
SANISH
8-2016
14
13
0
0
119
0
54
SANISH
7-2016
10
17
0
0
77
0
12
SANISH
6-2016
30
15
0
0
129
1
99
SANISH
5-2016
31
2
0
0
231
0
93
SANISH
4-2016
3
8
0
0
35
0
11
SANISH
3-2016
5
17
0
0
41
0
9
SANISH
2-2016
7
31
0
0
56
0
0
SANISH
1-2016
5
19
219
0
32
0
0
SANISH
12-2015
6
22
0
0
56
0
8
SANISH
11-2015
3
8
0
0
27
0
11
This well was shut in from December, 1997, to March, 2000 (over two years).
What did the production profile look like back in June, 1964, when they fracked the well with 10,000 lbs of water and a similar amount of glass beads?
Fracked on/about June 22, 1964:
SANISH
11-1964
23
2899
0
0
2635
0
0
SANISH
10-1964
29
3677
0
0
4875
0
0
SANISH
9-1964
30
4001
0
0
5296
0
0
SANISH
8-1964
29
4353
0
0
5296
0
0
SANISH
7-1964
24
3994
0
0
4699
0
0
SANISH
6-1964
30
2767
0
0
3998
0
0
SANISH
5-1964
23
1915
0
0
2850
0
0
SANISH
4-1964
26
2038
0
0
2830
0
0
SANISH
3-1964
31
2350
0
0
2526
0
0
SANISH
2-1964
29
2175
0
0
2488
0
0
SANISH
1-1964
31
2514
0
0
3236
0
0
SANISH
12-1963
30
2499
0
0
3154
0
0
SANISH
11-1963
24
2174
0
0
2706
0
0
SANISH
10-1963
29
2463
0
0
3372
0
0
SANISH
9-1963
30
2471
0
0
3446
0
0
SANISH
8-1963
31
2636
0
0
4024
0
0
SANISH
7-1963
29
2733
0
0
2848
0
0
SANISH
6-1963
14
1529
0
0
1950
0
0
SANISH
5-1963
27
2626
0
0
3164
0
0
SANISH
4-1963
30
2758
0
0
3236
0
0
SANISH
3-1963
25
2513
0
0
2982
0
0
It's hard to say that fracking made that much of a difference. Perhaps flattened out the decline rate.
This is what the first few months of this well looked liked:
