Strategies & Market Trends | The Financial Collapse of 2001 and Beyond


Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: bart13 who wrote (88484)3/27/2012 3:39:14 PM
From: Maurice Winn3 Recommendations   of 100672
 
Bart, here's how to escape your racism. Punish crooks whether they are big or small. I agree with you that evil-doing 1%er white collar criminals do enormous harm to lots of people. They destroy lives as surely as breaking into somebody's home, attacking them physically and robbing them. They should be punished for causing such great harm.

Bernie Madoff is in gaol for the rest of his life by the look of it. That's a fitting punishment [given the way people are punished].

Punishing all 1%ers because of the crimes of the few is racism by another name. There is probably a collection of 1%er genes which causes and enable them to become 1%ers. Punishing them all is evil. Punishing the actual crooks is the way to go. Taxing them all heavily to catch the few who are crooks is harmful. Consider Bill Gates and Warren Buffett for example. They have not robbed anybody.

They earned their money the hard way, by doing things that produce enormous wealth for everyone. Microsoft has enormously helped me in my life and billions of other people too, even if they don't directly use Microsoft. Not only have they earned vast wealth, they have set about using that wealth in philanthropic ways which are of great value but don't get a direct return on investment to the investors in those activities.

They could just give the money to governments to distribute but they have decided that they can do more good things by deciding how to spend that money without the envious voting to benefit themselves by voting to take that money from the government for themselves.

If there were Tradable Citizenships, government money would be wasted less as people would vote for their citizenship to go UP in value rather than down. Then people might choose to leave their money to the government rather than reinvent the wheel with their own philanthropic trusts.

When I was young, I didn't really mind taxes as they seemed to go to doing good things such as building dams, roads, and public assets. Almost nobody was on a benefit and unemployment was near zero. The few on benefits really had nowhere to go. The mentally and physically disabled needed support and they were few. Bludger was not far off a swear word. Now bludging is the norm in a vast tract of welfare and big government societies. But I soon learned that governments waste money by the ton and treat people are state-owned chattels.

Turning it around so that citizens own the state, rather than the state owning individuals, is the next stage of history. I should drop a line to Fukuyama to add another chapter to his "The End of History" [or whatever it's called]

Mqurice

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: bart13 who wrote (88484)3/27/2012 4:07:30 PM
From: RJA_   of 100672
 
I find it is not possible to dialog w/ MQ, as kicking up smoke & disappearing in same is not conducive to dialog.

Occasionally, however IMHO MQ is right, as here, so not all useless:

>>If people want some distributed to them, they should offer to do something useful at a low price.That's how I get my money and always have. I find that if I do a really good job really cheaply, it's very very easy to get money distributed to me. Those people who want opm should try it some time.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (88501)3/27/2012 5:00:07 PM
From: bart136 Recommendations   of 100672
 
Bart, here's how to escape your racism.

I just love specious ad hominems, don't you?

Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues - especially "who owns you?".





Punishing all 1%ers because of the crimes of the few is racism by another name.

Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues, and you avoid dealing with issues and simple questions - especially "who owns you?".






Overall though:

Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues, especially allowing you to avoid dealing with the very simple and direct question "who owns you?".





Ok, so you'd don't want to answer the question "Who owns you?" for many reasons.
Please continue to hoist yourself on your own petard, as usual and again.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: RJA_ who wrote (88502)3/27/2012 5:05:37 PM
From: bart138 Recommendations   of 100672
 
Of course MQ is right sometimes, he's not unintelligent or unread etc... but the off the cuff silly crud like everyone is owned, and his incessant use of logical fallacies and doofus/fake real debate style needs to be brought to light occasionally.






Here are many of the "tricks" he uses that are also used by others, most especially including the evil portion of the 1% and 99%... and most politicians and professional PR folk etc. too - and they only compose about 2% of the entire population per my work (and no, MQ is not one of those):



Logical fallacies



Formal fallacies
are arguments that are fallacious due to an error in their form or technical structure. All formal fallacies are specific types of non sequiturs.
  • Ad hominem: an argument that attacks the person who holds a view or advances an argument, rather than commenting on the view or responding to the argument.
  • Appeal to probability: assumes that because something could happen, it is inevitable that it will happen. This is the premise on which Murphy's Law is based.
  • Argument from fallacy: if an argument for some conclusion is fallacious, then the conclusion is not credible.
  • Bare assertion fallacy: premise in an argument is assumed to be true purely because it says that it is true.
  • Base rate fallacy: using weak evidence to make a probability judgment without taking into account known empirical statistics about the probability.
  • Conjunction fallacy: assumption that an outcome simultaneously satisfying multiple conditions is more probable than an outcome satisfying a single one of them.
  • Correlative based fallacies
    • Denying the correlative: where attempts are made at introducing alternatives where there are none.
    • Suppressed correlative: where a correlative is redefined so that one alternative is made impossible.
    • Fallacy of necessity: a degree of unwarranted necessity is placed in the conclusion based on the necessity of one or more of its premises.
  • False dilemma (false dichotomy): where two alternative statements are held to be the only possible options, when in reality there are more.
  • If-by-whiskey: An argument that supports both sides of an issue by using terms that are selectively emotionally sensitive.
  • Ignoratio elenchi: An irrelevant conclusion or irrelevant thesis.
  • Is-ought problem: the inappropriate inference that because something is some way or other, so it ought to be that way.
  • Homunculus fallacy: where a "middle-man" is used for explanation, this usually leads to regressive middle-man. Explanations without actually explaining the real nature of a function or a process. Instead, it explains the concept in terms of the concept itself, without first defining or explaining the original concept.
  • Masked man fallacy: the substitution of identical designators in a true statement can lead to a false one.
  • Naturalistic fallacy: a fallacy that claims that if something is natural, then it is good or right.
  • Nirvana fallacy: when solutions to problems are said not to be right because they are not perfect.
  • Negative proof fallacy: that, because a premise cannot be proven false, the premise must be true; or that, because a premise cannot be proven true, the premise must be false.
  • Package-deal fallacy: consists of assuming that things often grouped together by tradition or culture must always be grouped that way.
  • Red Herring: also called a "fallacy of relevance." This occurs when the speaker is trying to distract the audience by arguing some new topic, or just generally going off topic with an argument.



Informal fallacies:
Informal fallacies are arguments that are fallacious for reasons other than structural (formal) flaws.
  • Argument from repetition (argumentum ad nauseam): signifies that it has been discussed extensively (possibly by different people) until nobody cares to discuss it anymore
  • Appeal to ridicule: a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made by presenting the opponent's argument in a way that makes it appear ridiculous
  • Argument from ignorance (appeal to ignorance): The fallacy of assuming that something is true/false because it has not been proven false/true. For example: "The student has failed to prove that he didn't cheat on the test, therefore he must have cheated on the test."
  • Begging the question (petitio principii): where the conclusion of an argument is implicitly or explicitly assumed in one of the premises
  • Circular cause and consequence: where the consequence of the phenomenon is claimed to be its root cause
  • Continuum fallacy (fallacy of the beard): appears to demonstrate that two states or conditions cannot be considered distinct (or do not exist at all) because between them there exists a continuum of states. According to the fallacy, differences in quality cannot result from differences in quantity.
  • Correlation does not imply causation (cum hoc ergo propter hoc): a phrase used in the sciences and the statistics to emphasize that correlation between two variables does not imply that one causes the other
  • Demanding negative proof: attempting to avoid the burden of proof for some claim by demanding proof of the contrary from whoever questions that claim
  • Equivocation (No true Scotsman): the misleading use of a term with more than one meaning (by glossing over which meaning is intended at a particular time)
  • Etymological fallacy: which reasons that the original or historical meaning of a word or phrase is necessarily similar to its actual present-day meaning.
  • Fallacies of distribution
    • Division: where one reasons logically that something true of a thing must also be true of all or some of its parts
    • Ecological fallacy: inferences about the nature of specific individuals are based solely upon aggregate statistics collected for the group to which those individuals belong
  • Fallacy of many questions (complex question, fallacy of presupposition, loaded question, plurium interrogationum): someone asks a question that presupposes something that has not been proven or accepted by all the people involved. This fallacy is often used rhetorically, so that the question limits direct replies to those that serve the questioner's agenda.
  • Fallacy of the single cause ("joint effect", or "causal oversimplification"): occurs when it is assumed that there is one, simple cause of an outcome when in reality it may have been caused by a number of only jointly sufficient causes.
  • False attribution: occurs when an advocate appeals to an irrelevant, unqualified, unidentified, biased or fabricated source in support of an argument
    • contextomy (Fallacy of quoting out of context): refers to the selective excerpting of words from their original linguistic context in a way that distorts the source’s intended meaning
  • False compromise/middle ground: asserts that a compromise between two positions is correct
  • Gambler's fallacy: the incorrect belief that the likelihood of a random event can be affected by or predicted from other, independent events
  • Historian's fallacy: occurs when one assumes that decision makers of the past viewed events from the same perspective and having the same information as those subsequently analyzing the decision. It is not to be confused with presentism, a mode of historical analysis in which present-day ideas (such as moral standards) are projected into the past.
  • Incomplete comparison: where not enough information is provided to make a complete comparison
  • Inconsistent comparison: where different methods of comparison are used, leaving one with a false impression of the whole comparison
  • Intentional fallacy: addresses the assumption that the meaning intended by the author of a literary work is of primary importance
  • Loki's Wager: the unreasonable insistence that a concept cannot be defined, and therefore cannot be discussed.
  • Moving the goalpost (raising the bar): argument in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded
  • Perfect solution fallacy: where an argument assumes that a perfect solution exists and/or that a solution should be rejected because some part of the problem would still exist after it was implemented
  • Post hoc ergo propter hoc: also known as false cause, coincidental correlation or correlation not causation. (ex: Thousands of experiments have conclusively proven that beating drums and clashing cymbals brings back the sun after a total eclipse.)
  • Proof by verbosity (argumentum verbosium) (proof by intimidation): submission of others to an argument too complex and verbose to reasonably deal with in all its intimate details. see also Gish Gallop and argument from authority.
  • Prosecutor's fallacy: a low probability of false matches does not mean a low probability of some false match being found
  • Psychologist's fallacy: occurs when an observer presupposes the objectivity of his own perspective when analyzing a behavioral event
  • Regression fallacy: ascribes cause where none exists. The flaw is failing to account for natural fluctuations. It is frequently a special kind of the post hoc fallacy.
  • Reification (hypostatization): a fallacy of ambiguity, when an abstraction (abstract belief or hypothetical construct) is treated as if it were a concrete, real event or physical entity. In other words, it is the error of treating as a "real thing" something which is not a real thing, but merely an idea.
  • Retrospective determinism (it happened so it was bound to)
  • Special pleading: where a proponent of a position attempts to cite something as an exemption to a generally accepted rule or principle without justifying the exemption
  • Suppressed correlative: an argument which tries to redefine a correlative (two mutually exclusive options) so that one alternative encompasses the other, thus making one alternative impossible
  • Well travelled road effect: estimates of elapsed time is shorter for familiar routes as compared to unfamiliar routes which are of equal or lesser duration.
  • Wrong direction: where cause and effect are reversed. The cause is said to be the effect and vice versa.



Propositional fallacies:
  • Affirming a disjunct: concluded that one logical disjunction must be false because the other disjunct is true; A or B; A; therefore not B.
  • Affirming the consequent: the antecedent in an indicative conditional is claimed to be true because the consequent is true; if A, then B; B, therefore A.
  • Denying the antecedent: the consequent in an indicative conditional is claimed to be false because the antecedent is false; if A, then B; not A, therefore not B.



Quantificational fallacies:
  • Existential fallacy: an argument has two universal premises and a particular conclusion, but the premises do not establish the truth of the conclusion.
  • Proof by example: where examples are offered as inductive proof for a universal proposition. ("This apple is red, therefore apples are red.")



Formal syllogistic fallacies: Syllogistic fallacies are logical fallacies that occur in syllogisms.
  • Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise: when a categorical syllogism has a positive conclusion, but at least one negative premise.
  • Fallacy of exclusive premises: a categorical syllogism that is invalid because both of its premises are negative.
  • Fallacy of four terms: a categorical syllogism has four terms.
  • Illicit major: a categorical syllogism that is invalid because its major term is undistributed in the major premise but distributed in the conclusion.
  • Fallacy of the undistributed middle: the middle term in a categorical syllogism is not distributed.



Faulty generalizations:
  • Accident (fallacy): when an exception to the generalization is ignored
  • Cherry picking: act of pointing at individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position
  • Composition: where one infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some (or even every) part of the whole
  • Dicto simpliciter
  • Converse accident (a dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter): when an exception to a generalization is wrongly called for
  • False analogy: false analogy consists of an error in the substance of an argument (the content of the analogy itself), not an error in the logical structure of the argument
  • Hasty generalization (fallacy of insufficient statistics, fallacy of insufficient sample, fallacy of the lonely fact, leaping to a conclusion, hasty induction, secundum quid)
  • Loki's Wager: insistence that because a concept cannot be clearly defined, it cannot be discussed
  • Misleading vividness: involves describing an occurrence in vivid detail, even if it is an exceptional occurrence, to convince someone that it is a problem
  • Overwhelming exception (hasty generalization): It is a generalization which is accurate, but comes with one or more qualifications which eliminate so many cases that what remains is much less impressive than the initial statement might have led one to assume
  • Pathetic fallacy: when an inanimate object is declared to have characteristics of animate objects
  • Spotlight fallacy: when a person uncritically assumes that all members or cases of a certain class or type are like those that receive the most attention or coverage in the media
  • Thought-terminating cliché: a commonly used phrase, sometimes passing as folk wisdom, used to quell cognitive dissonance.



Red herring fallacies:
A red herring is an argument, given in response to another argument, which does not address the original issue. See also irrelevant conclusion
  • Ad hominem: attacking the person instead of the argument. A form of this is reductio ad Hitlerum.
  • Argumentum ad baculum (literally "appeal to the stick" or "appeal to force"): where an argument is made through coercion or threats of force towards an opposing party
  • Argumentum ad populum ("appeal to belief", "appeal to the majority", "appeal to the people"): where a proposition is claimed to be true solely because many people believe it to be true
  • Association fallacy (guilt by association)
  • Appeal to authority: where an assertion is deemed true because of the position or authority of the person asserting it
  • Appeal to consequences: a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument that concludes a premise is either true or false based on whether the premise leads to desirable or undesirable consequences for a particular party
  • Appeal to emotion: where an argument is made due to the manipulation of emotions, rather than the use of valid reasoning
    • Appeal to fear: a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made by increasing fear and prejudice towards the opposing side
    • Wishful thinking: a specific type of appeal to emotion where a decision is made according to what might be pleasing to imagine, rather than according to evidence or reason
    • Appeal to spite: a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made through exploiting people's bitterness or spite towards an opposing party
    • Appeal to flattery: a specific type of appeal to emotion where an argument is made due to the use of flattery to gather support
  • Appeal to motive: where a premise is dismissed, by calling into question the motives of its proposer
  • Appeal to nature: an argument wherein something is deemed correct or good if it is natural, and is deemed incorrect or bad if it is unnatural
  • Appeal to novelty: where a proposal is claimed to be superior or better solely because it is new or modern
  • Appeal to poverty (argumentum ad lazarum): thinking a conclusion is correct because the speaker is financially poor or incorrect because the speaker is financially wealthy
  • Appeal to wealth (argumentum ad crumenam): concluding that a statement is correct because the speaker is rich or that a statement is incorrect because the speaker is poor
  • Argument from silence (argumentum ex silentio): a conclusion based on silence or lack of contrary evidence
  • Appeal to tradition: where a thesis is deemed correct on the basis that it has a long-standing tradition behind it
  • Chronological snobbery: where a thesis is deemed incorrect because it was commonly held when something else, clearly false, was also commonly held
  • Genetic fallacy: where a conclusion is suggested based solely on something or someone's origin rather than its current meaning or context. This overlooks any difference to be found in the present situation, typically transferring the positive or negative esteem from the earlier context.
  • Judgmental language: insultive or pejorative language to influence the recipient's judgment
  • Poisoning the well: where adverse information about a target is pre-emptively presented to an audience, with the intention of discrediting or ridiculing everything that the target person is about to say
  • Sentimental fallacy: it would be more pleasant if; therefore it ought to be; therefore it is
  • Straw man argument: based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position
  • Style over substance fallacy: occurs when one emphasizes the way in which the argument is presented, while marginalizing (or outright ignoring) the content of the argument
  • Texas sharpshooter fallacy: information that has no relationship is interpreted or manipulated until it appears to have meaning
  • Two wrongs make a right: occurs when it is assumed that if one wrong is committed, another wrong will cancel it out
  • Tu quoque: the argument states that a certain position is false or wrong and/or should be disregarded because its proponent fails to act consistently in accordance with that position



Conditional or questionable fallacies:
  • Definist fallacy: involves the confusion between two notions by defining one in terms of the other
  • Luddite fallacy: related to the belief that labour-saving technologies increase unemployment by reducing demand for labour
  • Broken window fallacy: an argument which disregards hidden costs associated with destroying property of others.
  • Slippery slope: argument states that a relatively small first step inevitably leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant impact

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: The Jack of Hearts who wrote (88496)3/27/2012 7:35:42 PM
From: TobagoJack2 Recommendations   of 100672
 
per our continuing conversation re imperatives and solutions

bloomberg.com 

China Beats U.S. With Power From Coal Processing Trapping Carbon

By Bloomberg News - Mar 28, 2012 5:00 AM GMT+0800
Bloomberg Markets Magazine


After studying chemistry at Shanghai’s Fudan University, Jane Chuan and Wang Youqi pursued doctorates in the U.S. She got hers from what’s now the University of Buffalo in 1988, the year they married. Wang graduated in 1994 from the California Institute of Technology.

A few years later, they were cashing in stock options in Silicon Valley companies they’d co-founded, one of which created a luminescent chemical to store X-ray images. Their home in Atherton, California, had seven bedrooms, 11 bathrooms and an acre of land, Bloomberg Markets magazine reports in its May issue.







Enlarge image
The Huaneng's Dalate coal-fired-electricity-generating station towers stand near Ordos, Inner Mongolia, China, on Jan. 6, 2012. Photographer: Greg Girard/Bloomberg Markets via Bloomberg




By 2000, Wang was convinced that the research methods he was patenting could help stave off the environmental nightmare he saw unfolding during return visits to his homeland. China, already reeling from pollution, was poised to more than double coal consumption during the decade. That would choke cities with smog and exacerbate global warming.

Chuan, 61, bespectacled and smiling in her white lab coat, remembers pounding the pavement to pitch U.S. investors on cleaning China’s coal. Only a handful of California’s Internet- obsessed venture capitalists bit, she says.

Leveraging BrainpowerSo, in 2003, the couple moved back to Shanghai, the city from which they had emigrated 18 years earlier. They crammed into a 1,100-square-foot (100-square-meter) apartment that was hot in the summer, cold in the winter and crowded with two teenage children home from boarding school on weekends.

By 2006, Wang had his breakthrough in sight. He’d found a way to unlock a chemical stored in the coal that was poisoning his country and to put it to an unlikely use: cleaning China’s air.

The catalyst he discovered speeds reactions that convert methanol extracted from coal into a substance called dimethyl carbonate. By adding dimethyl carbonate to diesel fuel, Wang now plans to cut 90 percent of black carbon soot from the tailpipe emissions of 1,800 Shanghai buses by year-end.

“We said, ‘Let’s go to China, where we can leverage brainpower that’s cheaper and do something important for mankind,” says Wang, 55, a wiry, self-described workaholic who, on this January day, is taking a break from his laboratory to greet visitors in a conference room at Yashentech Corp., the couple’s Shanghai-based company.

Hooked on Coal Yashentech’s (0214009D) emissions-busting effort is one way in which China is racing to solve its clean-energy riddle: How can a country that’s hooked on coal mitigate environmental damage from the dirtiest of fossil fuels?

China passed the U.S. as the top carbon polluter in 2007; it now emits more than the U.S. and India combined, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Yet with 1.3 billion people, power-hungry industries and scant oil or natural gas, it has no immediate alternatives to coal for fueling its economy. China gets 70 percent of its energy from coal, three times the U.S. figure. It even converts coal into diesel fuel and ammonia that’s used for making fertilizer.

After consuming as much coal as did the rest of the planet combined in 2010, China still can’t muster enough electricity to avoid blackouts or accelerate the rise of its western provinces out of poverty, says Zhao Gang, director of a research institute at Beijing’s Ministry of Science and Technology.

By 2025, with 250 million more Chinese projected to be living in cities, China’s share of global carbon pollution will jump to 30.3 percent from 26.8 percent this year, the EIA says.

Meat, Fish, AirChina can’t quit coal. But with efforts from entrepreneurs, mining enterprises and electricity giants, it’s ready to tackle its addiction, says Zhou Fengqi, senior adviser to the Energy Research Institute of the government’s National Development and Reform Commission.

“Now that people have meat and fish to eat every day, the environment has also become a big concern,” Zhou says. “China is not like a developed country. We can’t simply stop using coal. If we want to use it, we have to clean it up.”

The cleanup is urgent because China’s air is so polluted it causes 470,000 premature deaths a year, says Zhang Junfeng, an environmental health professor at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles.

Since 2009, the U.S. Embassy has issued air-quality readings on microscopic soot in Beijing on Twitter. People across the city check the tweets before exercising or taking their children outdoors. The smog was thick enough on Jan. 10 that Beijing’s airport grounded 200 flights.

‘Desperate Need’Beijing Mayor Guo Jinlong pledged in February to slice his city’s pollution by reducing its coal consumption by two-thirds by 2020, among other efforts. Shanghai is cracking down on vehicle emissions with inspections next year that will force older, polluting cars off the road.

“You have to have a desperate need,” says Chuan, Yashentech’s evangelizing chief executive officer, to explain why the couple’s soot-scrubbing chemical is gaining traction in Shanghai. “In the U.S., the air is so clean there’s no urgency. In China, the need is here. The sense of opportunity is very, very real.”

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Tuesday proposed the first limits on greenhouse-gas emissions from power plants. The rules permit less than half the average emissions currently released by U.S. coal-burning plants, effectively preventing the construction of new coal-fired facilities that can't capture and dispose of their own carbon.

‘Highly Disrupted’Scientists say China must act now. The world has just two or three decades to avoid irreversible climate change, says Kelly Sims Gallagher, an energy professor at Tufts University in Medford, Massachusetts, and author of two books on pollution.

“If the Chinese don’t dramatically reduce carbon emissions from coal, there’s no way we can make a dent in climate change globally in the time period that matters,” Gallagher says.

David Fridley, at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, says it may already be too late to avert higher temperatures, rising seas and melting glaciers. He says China’s emissions won’t stop increasing until its population peaks at 1.45 billion in 2030 -- that’s 15 years after he predicts immutable global warming.

“If global emissions don’t start declining after 2015, all we can do is adapt to a world that will be highly disrupted,” he says.

Mindful of the brewing crisis, Chinese President Hu Jintao in 2005 began pressing 1,000 big steel mills, chemical factories, coal mines and power plants to use energy more efficiently. He ordered them to lower consumption by renovating boilers, trapping waste heat and other means.

Growing FaithThe government closed small polluters and toughened limits on vehicle, appliance and building emissions. It also accelerated solar, wind, hydro, natural gas and nuclear investments to cut coal as a percentage of electrical generation to 60 percent by 2020 from 80 percent in 2012, Zhao says.

At a United Nations meeting in Copenhagen three years ago, China pledged to cut by 2020 the ratio of greenhouse gas emissions per unit of economic output as much as 45 percent from the level in 2005.

China’s growing faith in its coal-cleaning technologies is one reason why the country agreed at a UN meeting in Durban, South Africa, in December -- after 15 years of resisting -- to seek legally binding international limits on carbon by 2015, Zhao says.

“We’ve achieved a foundation in terms of technical developments,” he says. “We can now solve some of these problems. We also have a great ability to invest.”

Inner Mongolia to AlgaeEfforts to tackle carbon pollution extend from labs such as Yashentech’s, which is seeking such clean-energy breakthroughs as new uses for coal and antidotes to its pollution, to a windswept hill in the northern desert, where China’s biggest experiment in burying CO2 is under way.

Here, in Inner Mongolia, the world’s largest coal company, Shenhua Group Corp (SHGCLZ)., is turning coal into diesel via a form of gasification called direct liquefaction. Gasification heats coal with oxygen to release gas that makes not only electricity but also fuel, methanol and the building blocks of plastics.

Shenhua is trying to find the best and cheapest way to dispose of the resulting waste carbon. It captures and buries some of it and is studying whether to pump it into oil wells to boost output.

Meanwhile, in a fishy-smelling lab in Langfang, a city just south of Beijing, ENN Energy Holdings Ltd. (2668) feeds carbon dioxide to microalgae. The company is eventually planning to get the organisms’ CO2 breakfast from its Inner Mongolia coal-to- methanol plant. In return, the algae yield oil for biofuels and omega-3 fatty acids that people can take to guard against heart disease.

‘Envy of the World’“The Chinese are deploying some of these decarbonizing technologies more aggressively than anyone,” says Chris Hartshorn, vice president of Boston-based Lux Research Inc., which on March 1 released a 40-page report on China’s technology priorities. “They have the money, and their system for investing simultaneously in research, technology and market adoption should be the envy of the world.”

China is underpinning its cleanup by boosting the efficiency of coal-burning plants. Turbines from Shanghai Electric Group Co. (601727), the world’s largest provider of coal-fired electricity-generating equipment, require less carbon-spewing rock to begin with.

China Huaneng Group Corp. (902) is designing its GreenGen plant in Tianjin to wring more power from coal while capturing more than 98 percent of its sulfur emissions, which can then be sold to industrial users. By 2016, Huaneng plans to trap 80 percent of GreenGen’s carbon emissions and use them to boost production in oil wells in nearby Bohai Bay.

‘Keep It Underground’Environmentalists say efforts to improve coal power are shortsighted because they divert attention and money from renewable energy.

“Electricity from coal plants that are designed to avoid filthy and uncontrolled pollution is two to three times more expensive than alternatives like wind and solar,” says Bruce Nilles, deputy conservation director of environmental advocacy group Sierra Club. “Coal is the biggest part of our carbon problem, and we’re fighting to keep it underground.”

A visit to a pollution-enveloped open-pit mine in Shizuishan on the banks of the Yellow River, which is swollen with ice on a January afternoon, shows the ground China must cover in its race to tame coal’s poisons.

Grime-Streaked MinersNorth of town, the cooling towers of a China Guodian Corp. (CNEPGZ) power plant are barely visible through gray smog. Inside the mine, coal buyer Wang Peng watches closely to make sure Guodian gets the right quality. Wang says the air is so foul in this city 515 miles (829 kilometers) west of Beijing that he and 80 percent of his co-workers have sent their parents to live in nearby Yinchuan. His 16-year-old daughter is studying in New York for the same reason.

“When we were kids, we used to drink from the rivers,” he says, gesturing toward the bleak landscape. “Now, we can’t.”

Shizuishan’s miners brave conditions that would be unimaginable in the West.

Two dozen men, none of whom wear masks, steer front-end loaders and steam shovels to pile coal into a parade of red trucks that back into spaces just inches apart. The trucks never stop for more than a few minutes, adding diesel fumes to coal dust. The miners, their exposed faces streaked with grime, balance on the trucks to direct the loaders as the hot coal sends up steam in the winter chill. After a few minutes, visitors’ handkerchiefs turn black when they blow their noses.

Coal BingeChina’s coal binge killed more than five miners every day last year, according to the State Administration of Coal Mine Safety. While China treasures its booming economy and newly minted billionaires, Wang worries about the price it pays.

“When we look into the sky, all we see is gray because of pollution the industries have caused,” he says.

A thousand miles southeast of Shizuishan, researcher Wang Hao explains how Shanghai Electric is producing turbines that require less coal from China’s 15,000 mines.

In a spotless work area with polished green floors, as 1,000-ton yellow cranes work overhead, he shows off turbine blades 12 feet (3.7 meters) in diameter. Some of the blades are twisted left and some are twisted right to capture every bit of energy from rushing steam. These turbines need 270 grams (10 ounces) of coal for each kilowatt-hour of electricity, down from 400 grams a decade ago.

Topping the U.S.

Shanghai Electric built this complex at Lingang in 2007 in a joint venture with Siemens AG (SIE), gaining access to technology from the Munich-based company. A decade ago, Shanghai Electric produced 15 steam turbines a year. Now, it makes 60 that can each produce up to three times as much energy. And after thousands of job cuts, it builds them for 30 percent less than Siemens does in Europe.

Efficient turbines have helped China top the U.S. in wringing power from coal. In 1949, the Chinese converted an average of 21 percent of coal’s energy to usable power, compared with 24 percent for the U.S., says Li Zheng, dean of the thermal engineering faculty at Beijing’s Tsinghua University. By 2011, China stood at 37 percent and the U.S. at 30 percent.

Huaneng says it will beat the average with 42 percent at GreenGen when the plant is completed in mid-2012.

The science ministry’s Zhao says that in addition to looking for efficiency, China is hunting breakthroughs in capturing coal’s pollutants -- and using them in new ways.

“Carbon capture is an important direction we want to take,” Zhao says. “A lot of companies are preparing for huge investments.”

Carbonated DrinksHuaneng’s technique for trapping pollution from its Shidongkou plant on the Yangtze River shows how capturing has already gained a foothold.

Scientist Liu Lianbo of Huaneng’s Clean Energy Research Institute says Huaneng traps the carbon from the plant’s smokestack and sends it through ammonia-derived chemicals called amines. The process isolates and concentrates the waste, removes heat and recycles the amines. Huaneng sells the carbon to makers of carbonated drinks and dry ice.

The cost to capture the carbon in 2011: $39 per ton. That’s about a third of the cost for most capture experiments in the U.S., Duke Energy Corp. (DUK) Chief Technology Officer David Mohler says.

U.S.-China CooperationIn one measure of China’s emerging technological leadership, the U.S. government is studyingHuaneng’s approach with help from its Chinese counterpart in Beijing. The DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory is monitoring the effort. Livermore engineers traveled to Duke’s facility in Gibson County, Indiana, in January to investigate how the U.S. company could adopt Shidongkou’s methods.

In a reversal of traditional roles, Huaneng isn’t sure how much proprietary data to reveal or how much to charge Duke for licensing, Livermore scientist Julio Friedmann says.

Companies may adopt carbon trapping because governments are likely to limit CO2 through taxes or emission caps, according to the 2011 annual energy outlook published by Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM), the world’s largest energy company by market value. By 2040, carbon costs may reach $80 a ton in the U.S. and $30 a ton in China, the report says.

China’s government is pressing to capture a million tons of carbon a year in a demonstration that will begin by 2015. That’s sparking a race for funding. Huaneng is competing with coal giant Shenhua, says Sung Ming, chief representative in Asia for Clean Air Task Force, a Boston-based nonprofit that advises the U.S. and China. PetroChina Co. (857) and other oil companies are interested, too, because blasting CO2 into oil wells can boost production.

In the U.S., each ton of $30 carbon can squeeze out two or three barrels of $125 crude.

Omega-3 Fatty AcidsIn his lab outside Beijing, ENN Energy Vice President Zhu Zhenqi is betting on carbon for a different kind of oil: omega-3 fatty acids.

Zhu, who looks like a college professor in his brown tweed sport coat, feeds CO2 that ENN produces in its lab to microalgae to harvest them for biofuel and food supplements. The green, single-cell organisms are so voracious they double in size every 24 hours.

Scientists have long known algae feed themselves by consuming CO2 during photosynthesis. ENN thinks it can turn carbon-gorging algae into a business. A company can grow 20 times more algae per acre than soybeans, Zhu says, while eliminating coal’s waste as the organisms gobble up CO2.

SpirulinaZhu leads visitors through a greenhouse-like laboratory where horizontally stacked water tubes run lengthwise. The hundreds of tubes all look about the same, even though they’re being used to test different kinds of algae, growing conditions and CO2 from several coal varieties. For now, ENN gets the CO2 from a nearby lab where the company, in another experiment, is simulating what it’s like to burn coal underground to reduce pollutants that reach the surface.

After feeding algae 110 tons of CO2 a year, ENN gets 20 tons of biodiesel fuel and 5 tons of protein. Zhu plans to expand to 20,000 tons of CO2 annually by 2013, using the waste carbon from ENN’s Inner Mongolia plant. ENN will turn the protein from the algae into fatty acids and spirulina, a protein-rich supplement Zhu says is so popular it sells for a higher price for its weight than crude oil.

“If we deliver to the energy market alone, we’re not going to make money,” he says.

Burying CarbonShenhua is exploring the possibility of ridding the planet of carbon pollution by burying coal’s poisons underground.

Along a stretch of desert in Erdos, Inner Mongolia, some 1,800 workers navigate a mile-long, $2.4 billion plant. They’re turning coal into 1 million tons of diesel, naphtha and liquefied petroleum gas for Shenhua’s truck fleet, PetroChina and other customers each year. Before Shenhua opened the plant in 2008, nobody had ever built a complex this big to make fuel from coal using direct liquefaction, chief engineer Shu Geping proudly says.

Workers heat and pressurize coal and capture the escaping chemicals in liquid form in a sealed vat. Then they blast them with hydrogen to make the fuel they seek, leaving liquid CO2 as a byproduct.

Trucks deliver 100,000 tons of the liquid each year to a hillside 10 miles west of the plant. Shenhua stores the CO2 in silver tanks, each decorated with a red star, until it’s ready to inject it through a wellhead to as deep as 8,000 feet.

Self-SufficientShu, who wears his jacket inside on this January day because he keeps his office cold, says Shenhua’s goal is to use coal -- the only resource China has in abundance -- for energy security. “In times of conflict, China must be self- sufficient,” he says.

Nonetheless, Shu is calculating how to cut the cost of capturing the carbon. Right now, trapping and burying CO2 costs $50 a ton, he says. That may drop to $14 a ton if he gets government approval to bury more. Costs are lower than for traditional plants because a coal-to-liquids facility like his can isolate pure carbon exhaust. In typical power plants, the carbon concentration in the exhaust is 10 to 12 percent, making it harder to catch.

Even after Shenhua captures 100,000 tons of CO2 a year, another 3.5 million tons escape at Erdos. Li Yan, head of climate campaigns for Greenpeace in East Asia, says that’s unacceptable.

‘Green Transition’Pollution from plants that use coal to make fuel and chemicals is one reason why China fell short last year in progress toward its pledge to cut greenhouse gases, she says. Such plants, built in the desert, also strain water supplies, she says.

China needs more renewable energy for generating electricity, not more coal, Li says.

“A green transition is something every country will face,” Li says. “Letting it happen faster will benefit China in every possible way.”

China’s biggest effort to reduce the impact of using coal to make electricity is taking shape in Tianjin, 70 miles southeast of downtown Beijing. The final touches are being put on the $1 billion GreenGen plant for its planned midyear opening.

GreenGen uses a process called integrated gasification combined cycle, or IGCC. It heats coal to form a chemical mix called syngas and sends that to a gas turbine to make electricity. Leftover heat goes to a steam turbine in a second step.

Keeping Coal ViableElectricity from early IGCC plants is expensive, at $175 per megawatt-hour, says Kieron Stopforth, a Bloomberg New Energy Finance analyst in London. That compares with $139 at traditional coal-fired plants that capture carbon and $72 at conventional plants that release carbon. Costs will drop as IGCC technology matures, Stopforth says.

Shanghai Electric, which built GreenGen’s steam turbines, plans to make gas turbines for 24 new IGCC facilities each year. That would create more gasification plants generating power from coal in one year than the total number that existed or were planned globally in 2010.

GreenGen may set off a wave of government approvals for the plants across China, Clean Air Task Force’s Sung says.

Duke Energy is keeping tabs on GreenGen as the U.S. struggles to maintain coal as a viable electricity source.

‘Harder to Use Coal’Duke has almost completed a 618-megawatt IGCC plant in Edwardsport, Indiana, using gasifiers designed by General Electric Co. and built in China by Hangzhou Boiler Group (002534). At $3.3 billion, it’s about $1 billion more than the original estimate. Duke altered the design, including making gasifiers taller for better maintenance. In some cases, engineers underestimated how much piping they’d need, raising costs. Even so, plant manager Jack Stultz says IGCC technology will shape coal’s future.

“Most regulations that are current or pending make it harder to use coal,” he says. “If we can’t do it here, coal’s life expectancy gets pretty short.”

Yashentech’s Chuan and Wang say China will need to burn coal far into the future, creating opportunities for their company and others focused on cleaning it up.

During the 2008 financial crisis, the couple took pay cuts and pledged their California home as collateral for loans to keep the company afloat. Today, there’s more interest. San Francisco-based Nth Power LLC is providing startup investments, following an original backer, Palo Alto, California-based Firelake Capital Management LLC. Yashentech is also trying to land Chinese government grants.

Pollution-Weary Chinese“In China, we get lots of support from the people, politicians and moneymakers,” Chuan says.

Wang, explaining the science behind his soot-reducing discovery, says the dimethyl carbonate his catalyst extracts from a derivative of coal is important because it’s rich in oxygen. That makes combustion more efficient, reducing carbon when diesel buses belch pollution.

Yashentech produces dimethyl carbonate for $730 a ton, or 36 percent less than rivals, he says.

Wang hopes that in 10 years, vehicles across China will run on sootless diesel, trimming carbon emissions 3 percent. That alone won’t stop global warming. But Wang says it will lift the hearts of pollution-weary Chinese whenever they step behind a bus and don’t get blasted by foul air.

China’s paucity of oil and natural gas and the slow commercialization of renewable energy mean the country may never kick its coal habit.

But with entrepreneurs such as Chuan and Wang, companies that are focused on curbing pollution and government making it imperative to do so, China is stepping forward in the race to tame a dirty fuel the world still can’t live without.

--John Lippert and Chua Baizhen, with assistance from Richard Weiss in Frankfurt, William Mellor in Sydney and Mark Drajem in Washington. Editors: Gail Roche, Jonathan Neumann

To contact Bloomberg News staff for this story: John Lippert in Chicago at jlippert@bloomberg.net

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (88432)3/27/2012 8:37:41 PM
From: TobagoJack   of 100672
 
hello haim, am light on equities, moderate on metals, high-ish on cash, gearing up to tune-out in alignment with impending and looked-forward to easter break with my mom, wife, kids at some eco place in the neighborhood w/i 3 hours flight time. may well be off the grid and unable to react to anything bad or good, so prefer to skip the window of disaster and door of opportunity

in the mean time, hk just had a leadership transition. judging by the western corporate press, the loser tang was their preferred choice even as the loser is a no-good playboy wastrel of the highest order and one who inherited his wealth.

the winner, and a deserving one, is of humble origins and a self-made billionaire.

the western corporate press has obviously wrong priorities.


just cleared from e-mail

From: j
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 6:51 AM
Subject: Re: Comments - Week of March 26


Here in hk we who are usually lazy just had those who are wise chose for us a true but neo-communist, one c.y. Leung en.wikipedia.org  who may well be a card-carrying man of some means and methods.

I fear "communism" is no longer a dirty word in two senses.

One sense, my suspicion is that c.y would prove to be a better than most champion of personal economic freedom, that which is the cornerstone of happiness, as well as the best guardian of private property rights, that being the keystone of general prosperity.

Second sense, I fear that the obamas n romney's of this galaxy may prove to be able to popularize communism of the old-fashioned sort to an extent mao and stalin never could.

In the meantime I want to do that which I should not, be bullish, and yet I fear so much, given the setup.

Shorted more puts on slw and going out one more month, per cloud-atm extraction and cyber-mining protocol. Was in need of cash flow, and so responded to bernanke's call to march on risk, to may. Next up, june, then july, ad infinitum.


-----Original Message-----
From: S
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 10:46:50
Subject: RE: Comments - Week of March 26

Yes I am now a free man on paper from the communist country of California.

S



-----Original Message-----
From: M
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 10:09 AM
Subject: Re: Comments - Week of March 26


I am so glad that I have never resided in California.....
zerohedge.com/news/guest-post-welcome-united-states-orwell-part-2-law-abiding-taxpayers-treated-criminals' target='_blank' >[url=http: 

And it sounds like New York is unsatisfied with their second place position
and are trying hard to catch up with California....
M

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: TobagoJack who wrote (88505)3/27/2012 8:40:35 PM
From: Snowshoe   of 100672
 
Team USA is phasing out the older coal plants and switching to natural gas.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: carranza2 who wrote (88424)3/27/2012 8:48:20 PM
From: TobagoJack   of 100672
 
am keeping eyes on the important:
- student loans,
- spain imperative / german sovereign debt
- syria / iran / , and
- global pension fund and money managers forced into risk;


and

am ignoring the inconsequential:
- usa elections

- china growth & reform / leadership transition
- n.korea anything
- bond market vigilantes

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: TobagoJack who wrote (88506)3/27/2012 8:51:43 PM
From: Snowshoe   of 100672
 
Western press I follow has been gleefully reporting on Henry Tang's follies... :O)

Row erupts over HK hopeful Henry Tang's basement
bbc.co.uk 



Illegal Basement Stirs Hong Kong Satirists
blogs.wsj.com 


Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Snowshoe who wrote (88507)3/27/2012 9:00:27 PM
From: TobagoJack   of 100672
 

while china shale gas reserve is supreme in this universe but must be nursed geology.com 

china is making important strides in thorium as well as pebble bed reactors per watch-n-brief

also working on seabed methane hydrate mining experiments, etc etc

i suspect such full-spectrum broad-bandwidth all-encompassing approach may lead to good returns

coal is good, but only if the technology improves and suspect shall as mind is kept on the matter

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2013 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.