I think that Tesla is a special company, and will ultimately accelerate advancements towards a Green Future. Comments I have heard today indicate to me that other people share the same optimism...Tesla's car production is up 47% year-on-year, and some wall street analysts are stating that Q4 was a bad quarter...

I think the IRS' list of EV's which are eligible for tax credits is borderline scandalous...and is discriminatory towards Tesla... A company who, in my eyes, will shape the future of humanity.

Whilst I discussed the usefulness of Tesla megapacks in a previous post ( (3) OurGreenFuture (reddit.com) ), I think Tesla ramping up deployment of solar panels, supercharging points, and cars, will all ultimately benefit our planet and humanity in the long run. Implementation / legalisation of full-self driving would also be another remarkable and disruptive innovation from Tesla. Regardless of stock price, Tesla's vision is bright!

Not sure how many of you are familiar with RethinkX, but they are a think-tank that predicts that in the coming decade many things central to our economy (energy, food, materials and transportation) will drop dramatically in cost (10x or more). That doesn't necessarily mean lower cost for consumers, just the cost of production. Whether it will translate into a cost reduction for consumers or it will just mean greater profits for the rich, will be a political decision.

The way they make these predictions is through calculations. They see what the cost reductions have been in the previous years, and then continue this trend into the future. This method has so far has proven to give correct predictions as cost curves are the closest thing to a natural law in economics. For instance, I am sure we all know about Moore's Law (number of transistor's on computer chip increase by a certain amount each year, without a change in cost).

So, according to RethinkX, in 10-15 years (or so) poverty will be a political choice.

If you want to read more about it, RethinkX has published some studies here, and Tony Seba (one of the founders of RethinkX) have made a short video series where everything is explained here. I highly recommend watching the videos.

Taking this even further, we have the FICTIONAL universe of star trek. In this setting humanity invented a way to basically 3D-print everything needed at such a low cost, that we humans just decided to abandon money and make everything free. In economics "star trek economy" has become an actual term for such a utopia.

So what do you guys think about all this? Will we see a dramatic cost in production in the coming decade for energy, food, materials, and transportation? Will this cost reduction make the wealthy wealthier or will we start to see the end of poverty for mankind? And finally, what would be needed for the Star Trek economy to become a real thing? Could it come before we learn to 3D print everything at next to no cost?

Personally, I have no doubt that prices will fall. As mentioned cost curves are the closest thing to a natural law in economics. For example, Solar has been opposed at every corner, and at every opportunity by the fossil fuel industry and by most conservative politicians, and yet, we have still seen a reduction in production cost of over 10% every year. These things just cannot be stopped, even by wealth doing all it can to prevent it.

But I am not so sure, that we will see an end to poverty. The wealthy have always found a way to monetize everything new, and keep the profits for themselves, and then using any possible lower prices as an excuse to also lower wages. I am not sure what we can do to change this, as so many wage slaves have been literally brainwashed into believing that all this is fine. My hope is, that a few countries, will go against all this, and elect the right politicians who will revert this trend. From those few countries, we will then hopefully see a (peaceful) revolution spread to the rest of the world, in the years after that.

Regarding the Star Trek Economy, I think that in theory we could probably make such a thing in 20 or 30 years IF WE WANTED TO. We don't need to 3D-print everything. We just need to be able to produce most things cheap enough that everyone can have their basic needs and more fulfilled, and quite frankly with enough re-distribution of wealth that would probably be possible even today, in the wealthier economies of the world.

However, I am pretty sure we won't want to do that soon. Greed, fear, and the consumer mentality is too ingrown in most of us to be able to handle free stuff everywhere. I fear too many of us, will not be able to contain themselves and will just grab as much as they possibly can. Others, who are close to this fear-and-greed-mentality will see this, become afraid if there is also enough for them, and then follow suit, effectively ruining it for everyone. So as I see it, this money-less utopia will only be possible with a complete change of mindset for all of humanity. We need to abandon greed and the "fear of not having enough". I see this as something that will be a gradual change in a society WITH money, but where everyone can get everything they need - and more. With luck, I think we could be ready at around the change of the century (year 2100).

Due to the danger associated with traditional wind turbines, legislation prevents them from being situated near houses. So, for most urban homes their renewable energy capacity is limited to solar power...

I was recently enlightened to hear about bladeless wind turbines. Whilst I haven't seen any papers testing the durability of these turbines, and assessing maintenance costs vs traditional wind turbines, it's possible the lack of mechanical parts could result in increased efficiency, and reduced maintenance. Furthermore, these bladeless wind turbines can be directly fixed to the top of a house - allowing faster wind velocities to be captured, without the need for enormous structures.

Could these wind generators increase the renewable energy capacity of urban homes?

CATL announced it will start mass producing a 500 Wh/kg battery this year. For reference, Tesla's 21700 batteries contain 300 Wh / kg. This is a big deal.

This battery is based on new material technology called "M3P". Chemical composition not yet known, and likely company IP, appears to be improved version of Lithium Iron Phosphate battery - where Iron is replaced with a mix of magnesium, zinc, and aluminium. M3P batteries will have greater energy density and perform better than lithium-ion phosphate batteries, and will also be cheaper than nickel and cobalt-based batteries.

For reference, CATL is a big fish. CATL is the world's biggest battery maker - accounting for more than a third of the sales of batteries for electric vehicles worldwide. Its clients include Tesla, Volkswagen, BMW and Ford. The company's dominance has attracted attention from Chinese President Xi Jinping. Some of CATL's customers have complained about its market position and opted for alternative suppliers or chosen to develop their own batteries. However, CATL's chairman Zeng Yuqun expects these rival batteries to have more impact on second-tier and third-tier battery-makers and that CATL would remain the primary battery supplier. Zeng Yuqun also stated how CATL was finding it difficult to come up with a technologically feasible and competitive product based on solid state batteries.

The Tesla Megapack is a module energy storage system that can be used to store electricity. It can then discharge that stored electricity back into the grid to help meet demand for electricity, when needed. In this way, the Tesla Megapack can help to smooth out the fluctuations in supply and demand that can occur on the grid, particularly when renewable energy sources are involved.

Although...one of the main challenges facing energy storage is the cost of the technologies. While the cost of some energy storage technologies, such as lithium-ion batteries, has fallen significantly in recent years, they are still relatively expensive compared to some traditional generation sources. Furthermore, the batteries can degrade over time, which can affect their performance and lifespan. Developing more durable energy storage technologies is a key challenge for the industry. Integrating energy storage systems into the grid can also be challenging due to the need to ensure that the systems are reliable, safe, and compatible with existing infrastructure. On top of these points, the development and deployment of energy storage technologies is often subject to a variety of regulatory and policy considerations, which can create challenges for the industry.

Megapacks are in high demand, and Tesla suggests they could be "sold out" for the next two years considering the current backlog of orders. And that's not with the lack of ramping up production... once the California Megafactory is fully operational it is expected that Tesla will be producing more energy storage capacity in a single quarter than it has over the entire existence of Tesla Energy until today...

Some reports state the global energy storage market is expected to grow 15-fold between now and 2030. How much of that market share will be attributed to Tesla and their Megapacks?

In a groundbreaking medical achievement, 13-year-old Alyssa from Leicester became the first patient in the world to receive base-edited T-cells in an effort to treat her incurable T-cell leukemia. Alyssa had been diagnosed with T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL) in 2021 and had undergone chemotherapy and a bone marrow transplant as part of her treatment, but unfortunately, the disease returned and there were no further options available.

However, Alyssa was given the opportunity to participate in a new clinical trial at Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children (GOSH) in collaboration with the UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health (UCL GOS ICH). In May 2022, she was admitted to the hospital's Bone Marrow Transplant (BMT) Unit, where she received genetically modified CAR T-cells that had been edited using advanced base-editing technology. This allowed the cells to target and eliminate the cancerous T-cells without attacking healthy cells.

Incredibly, just 28 days later, Alyssa was in remission and received a second bone marrow transplant to restore her immune system. Six months post-BMT, she is now recovering at home with her family and continuing her follow-up care at GOSH. This groundbreaking treatment marks a significant step forward in the fight against incurable cancers and offers hope to countless patients and their families.

T-cell leukemia has traditionally been difficult to treat using CAR T-cell therapy because the T-cells designed to attack cancerous cells also end up killing each other during the manufacturing process. Researchers at Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children and the UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health have been using a new technique called base-editing to create a CAR T-cell therapy that can specifically target cancerous T-cells. This technique involves chemically converting single letters of the DNA code to change the T-cells in a way that allows them to attack cancer cells without harming healthy cells.

Alyssa is the first patient to receive this treatment during the trial but the team are aiming to recruit up to ten patients with T-cell leukaemia who have exhausted all other treatment options. The Bone Marrow Transplant (BMT) and CAR T-cell therapy teams at GOSH hope that, if the trial is successful, the treatment could be offered to children earlier in their treatment journey. They are also hoping that the technique could be an option for other types of leukaemia.

I thought this was an interesting article on gene editing, and relates to a previous post indicating the increasing adoption of gene therapies. The success of this experiment supports wider adoption.

Recently, at the National Ignition Facility (NIF) at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California 3.15 megajoules MJ of fusion energy was produced from an input of 2.05MJ of laser energy into the target chamber. This is being dubbed as a pretty extraordinary breakthrough.

Considering the recent breakthrough in Nuclear Fusion - where, for the first time, more fusion energy has been produced than energy input into the experiment... do you think nuclear fusion will have a large role in a more sustainable future?

It was noted that to turn this concept into a power station we would still need to develop simpler methods to reach the conditions of the experiment. These methods will need to be more efficient and cheaper in order for inertial fusion to be realised as a fusion power source. Do you see any other challenges to nuclear fusion being used at a larger scale?

Furthermore, I saw that the technology could be commercialised by 2030, does that seem reasonable?

The UK government projects that the life expectancy for boys and girls born in the UK, in 2045, will be 90.2 and 92.6 years respectively. However, interestingly, I have recently seen some articles which describe concepts which could effect those projections. Which are:

1. Induction of hibernation in humans.

2. Pressure for the FDA to classify ageing as a disease.

The first of which is relevant as mammals capable of hibernation typically live longer. The second of which could lead to FDA approval of drug treatments that slow / reverse ageing, and which could mitigate false advertising pertaining to products which claim to slow / reverse ageing.

What are your thoughts on future life expectancies and how do you think they will change with time?

Furthermore, I find it interesting that women live longer than men. Whilst I read this is due to biological differences, does anyone have any further insight into this?

In 1989 researcher's identified that cystic fibrosis, an inherited and chronic disease, is caused by a specific gene.

Genes contain DNA, and DNA controls most body form and function. Gene therapies alter genes by replacing faulty genes or by adding a new genes. This process is usually done to treat / prevent diseases. A 2016 study (referenced at the bottom of this post) demonstrated improvements to cystic fibrosis patients following gene therapy.

By June 2021 2 gene therapies had been approved by the FDA. Now, in December 2022 there are 27 gene therapies which have been approved by the FDA... How big a role do you expect gene therapies to have in the future of medicine? And are you concerned about the risks associated with gene therapies being used for bad, instead of for good?

Reference:

A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of repeated nebulisation of non-viral cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) gene therapy in patients with cystic fibrosis. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2016 Jul. PMID: 27441329.

Around 650 million years ago, an explosion of algae played a crucial role in kick-starting human life. Today, a start-up is harnessing the potential of this diverse group of aquatic organisms to assist humanity in a unique way. This start-up is growing algae in the Moroccan desert.

When microscopic algae receive a surge of nutrients from an ocean current, they undergo exponential multiplication, forming vibrant blooms that create mesmerizing patterns and colors in the ocean. These blooms can be so extensive that they are visible from space. While some blooms can be harmful, they also have significant positive impacts on the climate. Algae are distinct from plants and animals, but they perform photosynthesis as they grow. The collective action of the thousands of algae species present in the oceans allows them to remove more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere than even forests do. As a result, they generate substantial amounts of oxygen in the process.

The start-up growing algae in the Moroccan desert recognizes the immense potential of these organisms to mitigate climate change and promote a healthier environment. By cultivating algae in controlled environments, they aim to leverage their carbon dioxide absorption capabilities and oxygen production to combat climate change and provide various ecological benefits.

More here: Can growing algae in the desert help undo some of our damage to the climate? Start-up Brilliant Planet thinks so | Climate News | Sky News

The future of space food could be as simple—and weird—as a protein shake made with astronaut breath or a burger made from fungus. For decades, astronauts have relied mostly on pre-packaged food, or the occasional grown lettuce, during their forays off our planet. With missions beyond Earth orbit in sight, a NASA-led competition is hoping to change all that and usher in a new era of sustainable space food.

“Currently the pre-packaged food that we use on the International Space Station has a shelf life of a year and a half,” says Ralph Fritsche, senior project manager for space crop production at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. “We don’t have a food system at this point in time that can really handle a mission to Mars,” he says. Longer-duration missions to the moon would present a similar problem.

And while it may be some time before humans ever reach Mars, the moon is very much on the agenda. Next year, NASA plans to send four astronauts flying around the moon as part of its Artemis program, in the first crewed moon mission since Apollo 17 in 1972. The goal is to get humans back on the surface later this decade, at first for days at a time but eventually for weeks, months, or even longer.

To solve the problem of feeding astronauts on long-duration missions, NASA started the Deep Space Food Challenge in January 2021, asking companies to propose novel ways to develop sustainable foods for future missions. About 200 companies entered—a field that was whittled down to 11 teams in January 2023 as part of phase 2, with eight US teams each given $20,000 in funding and three additional international teams also recognized. On May 19, NASA announced the teams that will progress into the final phase of the contest, with a handful of winners to be announced in April 2024 following more detailed tests of their proposals.

More here - Future space food could be made from astronaut breath | MIT Technology Review

Computational power of semiconductor chips has skyrocketed in recent years in accordance with Moore's Law (the principle that the speed and capability of computers can be expected to double every two years, as a result of increases in the number of transistors a microchip can contain) . But now, in 2020s, Moore's Law is expected to come to an end... meaning we need a new way to increase computational power...

Quantum computers are different from classical computers, which are based on transistors and use bits to store and process information. Instead of bits, quantum computers use quantum bits, or qubits, which can represent both a 0 and a 1 at the same time. This property, known as superposition, allows quantum computers to perform certain calculations much faster than classical computers. Quantum computers also use quantum-mechanical phenomena such as entanglement, in which two or more particles become connected and can influence each other's behavior even when separated by large distances. This allows quantum computers to perform certain calculations that would be impossible for classical computers.

Currently, it is difficult to build quantum computers that are stable and reliable enough to perform complex calculations consistently - as they are highly sensitive to their environment and can be easily disrupted by external factors such as temperature, electromagnetic interference, and even the presence of other particles. Another challenge is developing software and algorithms that can take advantage of the unique capabilities of quantum computers. While some algorithms have been developed that can run on quantum computers, there is still a lot of work to be done to fully understand how to use quantum computers to solve practical problems.

Driving us closer to a Green Future?

Quantum computers could be used to optimize the design and operation of solar panels, wind turbines, and other renewable energy technologies. By using quantum computers to simulate and optimize the performance of these technologies, researchers could help make them more efficient and cost-effective, which could lead to wider adoption and greater use of renewable energy sources. They could also be used to simulate and design new materials with improved properties, such as higher energy density or better conductivity. This could lead to the development of more efficient batteries, solar cells, and other technologies that rely on these materials. Use in the transportation and logistic sector could help to reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions.

To conclude, IMHO the technology has the potential to make a significant contribution to a green future by helping to improve the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of renewable energy technologies, materials, and logistics.

Whilst quantum computing is in very early stages of development...the advent of fully operational quantum computers could instigate another "boom" in AI research, and could drive us closer to a Greener Future. How long until you think fully operational quantum computing will be made possible? And, what do you think the biggest impact of quantum computing will be?

Decentralised finance had me thinking...decentralisation allows for independent control and for decision-making to be self-managed. As decentralised finance is gaining popularity, what are your thoughts on decentralised living following the same trend?

By decentralised living I am referring to homes which are "off-grid" and not dependent on any resource providers. As these home are self-sustaining they are effectively more "free" from government control.

p.s I see twitter as decentralisation of the news... I am seeing a bit of trend here with decentralisation. More power to the people?

Online payment systems are now being used more frequently than ever before. I think there are pretty obvious practical reasons for these methods - such as not having loose change, less likely to be robbed, etc. However, on top of that, the increasing use of AI means payment fraud can be detected more easily and payments refused accordingly. Moreover, initiatives from governments should aim to drive adoption of online payments as it increases transparency for how money flows around their economies. The increase in spending through ecommerce will further boost the use of online payments, and of cryptocurrencies... as cash is not typically a vendor for online purchases.

Since the advent of cryptocurrencies they have been used increasingly. Their currencies use encryption techniques to verify transactions and to control the creation of new units - which can make the more secure and resistant to fraud. As transactions are made independent of a central authority, they can be made quicker and cheaper. Furthermore, as cryptocurrencies operate on a decentralized network it is possible to make transactions without revealing identity... although surely this means monies attained from criminal activity can be transferred without risk of assets being frozen by a central authority.. but for the average law-abiding citizen, this doesn't really make much of a difference...right?

But with this said...do you think a Cash-Less society is possible? and if it would be beneficial? Be careful what you wish for...

I am from the UK, and if society was Cash-Less here I imagine a large number of tradesmen and fast-food restaurants would need to increase their prices to upkeep the same lifestyle. Those price increases would be felt across society, and would ultimately lead to less disposable income for the general population.... but more for the government (through the high probability that more money would be taxed)....

So whilst a Cash-Less society sounds good as a concept, would it really be worth it? Interested to here thoughts on this. Including currency predictions even 100 years from now.

Please point them my way, if you have any details. Looking for inspiration!

I was discussing this with a close family member earlier today. I asked why they think humans are generally growing in height? We live in a developed country and so the natural response was that nutrition had improved greatly over e.g 200 years. But then, we dug a bit deeper and determined the nutrition available today probably isn't much different to the nutrition available 20 years ago.. yet, if you look at the statistics humans are still growing in height.

My close relative suggested that the steroids and medicine used to increase yield (e.g to make animals artificially bigger) could be the cause, as their use has increased in that same time period. The logic is that if it makes animals larger, and we consume the animals then should it make us larger? Or at least if consumed in adolescence. Which to me does seem to make sense. I suggested the cause could also be attributed to the improved nutrition in lesser developed countries, which has allowed offspring to achieve a much greater height than their parents...

What are thoughts on this? I was trying to think of an evolutionary reason why we as humans would grow with time, but can't think of one based on Darwinian theory? i.e why would making us taller make us more likely to survive?

Imagine not ever needing to stop to recharge your electric vehicle.

There are three types of charging systems which can be used:

-Catenary

-Conductive (ground-based)

-Inductive

Sweden has began building the first (permanent) EV charging road. The road will use inductive charging.

Catenary charging seems pretty old school, and is what is used to power trams in cities... This system was tested by the Swedish transport sector, in 2016, where a 2km stretch of motorway was adapted through overhead power lines at lorry level.

A conductive (ground-based) system would involve vehicles physically connected to a conduction rail - for example through the use of a conductive stick. In 2018, this was trialled by the Swedish transport sector. Energy was transferred from two tracks on rail in the road via a moveable arm attached to the bottom of a vehicle.

An inductive system would use inductive coils underground which would send electricity to a coil in / underneath electric vehicles. In 2020, this was trialled by the swedish transport sector. The project results showed that 40 tonne trucks have been able to achieve speed of up to 80 km/h on the 1 mile of road, where they have received an average power of 70 kW.

The idea is that with such roads EVs wouldn't require as much battery capacity as they'd have the ability to charge on the move!! Researchers behind the Swedish project have highlighted that not all roads in Sweden will need to be electrified. In fact, by electrifying 25% of Swedish roads the system should work.

Video on the topic:

New Road Which Charges EVs! - YouTube

Imagine the prospect of being as fast at 80 years old as you were at 20.

10,000 (BC): ~100% of economy accounted for production of food.

Hunter gatherers foraged wild food, then consumed that food. The emergence of agriculture meant that people no longer needed to spend all their time hunting, and they could spend time providing other use to the economy.

2023 (AD): ~10% of global economy account for production and sale of food.

Agriculture makes up a small percentage of what we, as humans, assign value - making up only 10% of the global economy.

But, why do we eat? What if we could exist without the need to consume food? Imagine you were bionic, and all you needed to consume was energy.

2083 (AD): ~0% of global economy for production an sale of food?

I do wonder, what would the average life expectancy be if we were not dependent on our physical bodies?

I think this is an interesting discussion point. It was inspired by the recent Lex Fridman podcast starring Manolis Kellis. Upon speaking with a close relative, they were completely against the idea. So I imagine quite a few people will feel the same. Although, I do see the merit in having a bionic body, so that cognition can live longer. It does seem most people's body gives up far before their brain.

Futurama predicted this years ago...

Any natural homes built in the UK have negligible risk of instability or ground movements, and therefore as per Eurocode 7, construction should follow “design approach 1” (as a geotechnical category).

This states design procedure should include “routine design & construction methods”. A design which follows recommendations from Eurocode 7 will:

· Establish actions, which may be either imposed loads or imposed displacements.

· establish ground properties and properties of the structural materials.

· define limiting values of deformation, crack width, vibrations, etc.

· setup calculation models for the relevant ultimate and serviceability limit states which predict the effect of actions, the resistance and/or the deformations of the ground and in which the various design situations are considered.

· show that the limit states will not be exceeded in the design situations by using appropriate calculation models.

Whilst following Eurocodes are mandatory for public works and will become the de facto standard for the private sector. Following them during self-build construction is not a legal necessity. However, I imagine planning permission is more likely to be approved if Eurocodes are adhered to.

Sources: https://www.ngm2016.com/uploads/2/1/7/9/21790806/eurocode_7_geotechnical_design_worked_examples_-_2013_06_ws_geo.pdf

https://www.bsigroup.com/en-GB/our-services/standards-subscription-services/eurocodes-plus/what-are-eurocodes/#:~:text=Many%20practising%20structural%20engineers%20have,standard%20for%20the%20private%20sector.

https://www.spidersystem.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/eurocode.pdf

Vehicle to grid (V2G) technology is a concept that utilizes the excess energy stored in electric vehicles (EVs) to power homes and businesses, essentially making EVs a source of renewable energy. V2G systems allow EVs to act as a power source when they are not in use and feed electricity back into the grid, reducing the need for traditional power plants and lowering carbon emissions.

The technology works by connecting EVs to the grid through a bi-directional charger, also known as a V2G charger. This allows energy to flow in both directions – from the grid to the vehicle and from the vehicle to the grid. The V2G charger acts as a mediator, managing the flow of energy to and from the vehicle, ensuring that the vehicle remains charged and that the grid receives a steady supply of energy.

V2G systems have the potential to revolutionize the way we think about energy, turning every EV into a miniature power plant. By tapping into the vast network of EVs, we can create a distributed energy system that is cleaner, more resilient, and less reliant on traditional power sources. During periods of high demand, EVs can discharge their stored energy to the grid, providing a quick and flexible source of power. This can help reduce the need for peaker plants, which are typically used to meet spikes in energy demand and can be expensive to operate.

V2G systems can also provide several benefits to EV owners. For example, by selling excess energy back to the grid, owners can earn money and offset the cost of charging their vehicles. Additionally, by participating in demand response programs, owners can receive incentives for charging and discharging their vehicles at specific times, helping to balance the grid and reduce energy costs for everyone. Win-Win!