So is it bad that governments don't allow the processes and manufacturing to take place in their own countries, allowing independence and market dynamics and economies of scale to result in yet another order of magnitude cost reduction in solar? Or is it good that China doesn't do ecological protections, worker protections, or the things that western countries do, so we get to profit from the exploitation and pollution of their people and land?
It'd sure be awesome if regulations and regulators in Western countries weren't stupid. This whole game is just insane.
Let's just pawn it of on China, arbitrage the regulatory and human rights differential, and pretend the value is the same as if it's locally manufactured. Then we pocket the difference! Number go up!
Economists have this thing called "comparative advantage".
E.g. the US specialises in software; China in PV and batteries; EU in industrial equipment; the Middle East, oil; Australia IIRC is minerals; each trades what they're optimised for in exchange for what the others are optimised for, and are better off for it.
This works only so long as nobody is dominating a strategic sector, something that everyone needs but they are such a major player they get to set the prices. Monopolistic behaviour, but from a nation that cannot be sued for it rather than a corporation which can be ordered broken up.
Unfortunately, OPEC was already a thing even before Hormuz, the MAGA tariffs are confused and seem to be trying to make the US into an autarky but also keeping trade open so it can be taxed, and China seems to want to be dependent on nobody else while also keeping everyone else dependent on them, which currently leaves the EU and similar currently holding this particular hot potato and goodness only knows in which direction and on what schedule we'll yeet it elsewhere.
> What about Africa and the rest of Asia? Surely they merit mention more than Australia?
This isn't a term paper, I'm just giving illustrations from a handful of places to demonstrate how comparative advantage works.
And sure, other Asian nations are significant (India: Petroleum; Japan: Cars; South Korea: Integrated circuits; Taiwan's defence policy is making TSMC too important to be allowed to be invaded).
But Africa? No. The continent's exports are mostly dominated by South Africa, which is about one third of Australia's; even in aggregate, the entire continent's exports are only at about the level of Canada's.
> Also, Australia's number one export are Hollywood actors.
Trump cancelled a ton of green energy initiatives, why are we blaming the same regulators you imply are a good thing by pointing out that China "doesn't do ecological protections"?
Oceania too: Australia installed 442 MW of residential solar and 2.5 GWh of residential batteries in the month of April alone. Both numbers are partly juiced by changes to a rebate program from May, but the overall trend remains explosive growth.
Which is pretty much what Australian average price is. Average Australian domestic tariff is around AUD 0.30/kwh which is USD 0.21/kwh.
None of this touches on standing charges, I don't know how that works in the USA, in Australia for an average household it runs at AUD 1.00/day to AUD 1.50/day (USD 0.70/day to USD 1.00/day). For an average household the standing charge is going to add 15 to 20% to the tariff.
I'm assuming that standing charges are like meter fees here. I've paid as low as $0.25/day and as high as $1.25/day depending on where I lived. There's not much uniformity.
BYD is not just zippy little city cars. The BYD Sealion 7 SUV (EV) and Shark full-size truck (PHEV) are incredibly popular in Australia, which is a very similar market to the US, and I'm sure they would sell like hotcakes if allowed into the US.
Herbert wrote other books about the dangers of god-like AI, so it wasn't just an "I don't want this."
Dune is very much about systems of power and oppression, the obvious and less obvious forms they take, and the way they transcend and direct individuals. Even when the individuals are almost omnipotent - in theory.
The whole point of Dune is that these systems are human, but have an independent life of their own.
The narrative is about modes of human supremacy, and a jihad against AI isn't just some optional world building, it fits the narrative perfectly.
Also reminds me of the shield technology and laser weapons. Making them go boom when put together is a way to get rid of them and ensure certain kind of setting. Even if the whole thing is just weird if think about physics.
The article's somewhat dubious argument is that the 2012 budget estimate was $1.5B, the actual cost by 2017 was $1.9B, and the $400M difference was caused entirely by Atherton's law suit.
Which is obviously a bit sus, because the actual lawsuit froze everything for only around 18 months from Feb 2015 to Sep 2016.
there was also a delay in the decision for funding until may 2017. that's another 8 months. but then we don't know when that decision would have been made originally.
reply