Wither Bitcoin? Up, up, and away, crashing or banned?

Bitcoin was first issued in March 2010 with a value set at $ 0.003/unit.

In May 2010, 10,000 bitcoins were traded for 2 pizzas in Jacksonville, Florida.

Since then the bitcoin price has gone up and down, mostly up, but five times it has gone down drastically, sometimes crashing by as much as 80 percent.

This year it has had a meteoric rise and is now at $18,600 or about six million times its original offering price.

Bitcoin is anonymous trading between a willing buyer and a willing seller, totally safe and untraceable, an ideal vehicle for money laundering and transfer of  money to terrorists and allies alike. It is also the vehicle of choice for ransomware.

So who is keeping custody of the chain of transactions to keep the bitcoin safe and secure?

This is what one might call the ultimate revenge of the geeks. The inventors of bitcoin let the geeks mine more bitcoins as a reward for keeping complete records of all transactions in bitcoin since its conception (heavily encrypted of course). They only had to solve a hashing algorithm made more complicated for every new transaction.  In the beginning it was not very difficult, but now, since one has to find all chains of custody for every bitcoin since the start, and they are distributed worldwide it becomes more and more a drain on the internet and computing power in the servers.

It is now so bad, that even though there are only 17 million bitcoins in the world today, to keep track of them and mine some more is now consuming 1/700 of the total electricity generated in the world, or about 35 TeraWatthours. At a production cost of about 6 cents per KiloWatthour  it  would come to about 2 billion dollars to maintain 17 million or over a hundred dollars per bitcoin in electricity consumption alone.

It will only get worse from now on. While mining of new bitcoins are getting more complicated exponentially, the issuing of new bitcoins will become stagnant and will stop around 30 million, when it will consume about 60% of the world’s electrical energy.

The Greens will not like it. Bitcoins already belch  more than 17 million tons of CO2 into the air annually, set to double every two years.

On the other hand , it is transactions that are free of the tyranny of the one world banking system.

This is unsustainable. People will stop maintaining the chain of custody of all transactions and the scheme will collapse.


Who knows?




And then there was one. U.S. alone fights climate change the right way.

At the climate conference in Bonn, Germany, Syria signed the so called Paris Accord on Climate Change, leaving the United States alone as a non-signer.

Our European friends are quite upset about this. After all, countries like Denmark and Germany have the highest residential electricity rates in the world to pay for their wind and solar power installed. Here are the countries with reduced CO2 emissions this century:

But if one looks at the absolute decline in CO2 emissions, the U.S. leads the pack hands down:

So, who is the biggest CO2 villain? It is China by 6500 million tons of oil equivalent increase since 2000.    According to the Paris accord China is allowed to emit 6 times as much CO2 as the U.S. And not only that, the U.S. would pay them as one of the “developing” countries to do that!

Hillary okayed sale of Uranium mine to Russia for bribes, donations and a honorarium.

So Hillary sold our Uranium

for bribes and a huge honorarium.

Putin sold to Iran

yellow cake, with no ban.

Is anything left in her cranium?

This sheds new light on her “Reset” with Russia in Geneva, March 2009.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton opened her first extended talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov by giving himperegruzka a present meant to symbolize the Obama administration’s vow to “press the reset button” on U.S.-Russia relations.

She handed a palm-sized box wrapped with a bow. Lavrov opened it and pulled out the gift: a red button on a yellow base with a Russian word peregruzka printed on top.

“We worked hard to get the right Russian word. Do you think we got it?” Clinton asked.

“You got it wrong,” Lavrov said.

Instead of “reset,” Lavrov said the word on the box meant “overcharge.”peregruzkareset

Hillary and Sergei laughed.

“We won’t let you do that to us,” she said.

It doesn’t say ПЕРЕГРУЗКА on the button, it says PEREGRUZKA. The mistranslation is bad enough, but using Roman letters instead of Cyrillic? What was going on? Didn’t anyone realize they use a different alphabet over there? There are two possible explanations: Ignorance, or arrogance on the part of the Hillary Clinton State Department. I know  Hillary Clinton has demonstrated plenty of both in statements such as: “What difference does it make?”

How has this reset worked out for us? Besides Iran, Syria, Turkey, Hezbollah, Libya, Pakistan, Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria and many other countries where U.S. and Russia have opposing interests, and Poland where we plainly sold out the missile defense, we are in a pickle on at least two fronts:

1. Space exploration.

Since Obama made it NASA’s highest priority to promote the contributions of Islam to science and the scrapping of the space shuttle program with no replacements in sight we are still totally dependent on Russia to ferry our astronaut scientists to and from the space station.

Russia is doing the rational thing: Tripling the fees from $22 million to  $71 million to transport just one American astronaut to the International Space Station (ISS) aboard its Soyuz spacecraft in 2016. –

2. Uranium. By selling 20% of our Uranium to Russia via a Canadian Corporation in exchange for a a total of $145 million donations to the Clinton Foundation and a half million dollar speaking fee for Bill Clinton, this has left us vulnerable to extortion, since we are 90% dependent on imported Uranium for our electricity production. The U.S. only have 1.9% of the world’s Uranium resources. Losing control over 20% of the 1.9% means we are now even more vulnerable in our power generation, not to mention national security.

Maybe Hillary really meant “Overcharge” instead of reset? Hillary, as well as Obama seemed to love to give money and influence to our adversaries instead of caring about our economy at home.

We need a major national effort in developing Thorium based Nuclear energy. there is a million year supply of Thorium, as opposed to Uranium, where we are hopelessly reduced to importing 92% or more of our need.

Here are https://lenbilen.com/2017/07/14/twenty-two-reasons-to-rapidly-develop-thorium-based-nuclear-power-generation/

One more reason to switch to Thorium as feed-stock for nuclear power.

Uranium is the feed-stock for nuclear power. It is also the material necessary to make nuclear bombs.

The United States has 138,200 tonnes of Uranium reserves recoverable at less than $260 per kilogram, 1.9% of the world total.

The United States has, as of 2014, produced 343,075 tons of Uranium, or about 13% of the world total.

The United States consumed in 2016 18,69 tons of Uranium, about 29% of the world total, about 90% of which was imported.

Which brings up the following question: Why did the Obama administration sell 20% of our proven reserves of this strategically important material to Russia?

It is of utmost importance to immediately restart the development of nuclear reactors that use Thorium as its feed-stock.

The other 22 reasons to switch to Thorium are listed here:


A truly smart electricity meter will revolutionize our electricity use.

Sixty years ago I worked as a plate scrubber and errand boy in a Swedish bakery. In one corner of the bakery stood the oven, a giant cement and stone contraption weighing at least 50 tons. It was run on electricity, turning on every night at 10 P.M. and turning itself off at 5 A.M. First in the morning we baked the Danishes and other good stuff that required the highest heat, and as the day wore on and the oven cooled off, other breads were baked in the order of temperature need. It took some planning, but the price difference between night rates and day rates made it all worthwhile.

This brings me to a truly smart electricity meter.

It would charge the customer at the current cost of generation + transmission cost + utility profit, displaying the current cost at any given time of the day.

The customer would have the right to sell back electricity to the net at the current cost of generation – transmission cost – utility profit.

Knowing the current true price of energy the customer can then delay turning on the clothes dryer until the price goes below an acceptable level. He could take a look at the current price and decide to turn off the air conditioner rather than pay $1.20 per KW, or she could decide: It is worth it.

By making the user rather than the power company decide how and when electricity is used and produced this will bring immense benefits:

Many users will decide to buy a backup generator with battery, charge the battery when the price is low, and discharge the battery when the price is high. If there is excess battery capacity, he can even sell back the excess at the inflated price. And if the price is high enough it is cheaper to use the generator.

This will have immense benefits on the grid, lessening peak demand and increasing the off peak use.

And best of all, should the grid fail, there will be enough generating capacity to run the refrigerators and essential stuff until power is restored.

What prevents this from being realized?

Politicians and the power companies desire to maintain total control over how the net is used. Political regulators hate to give decision making power back to the people.




The piezoelectric effect of tears, a source of power?

The piezoelectric effect

of tears, this we must not neglect.

For the climate change cries

that bring tears to their eyes,

is power that powers their sect.

From wattsupwiththat 

From the UNIVERSITY OF LIMERICK and the “now if we can just keep people wailing about climate change we’ll have sustainable energy” department. Reports are that “weepy Bill McKibben” will be the first large scale electric tears generation facility. Eric Holthaus will be in the control group:

Irish scientists can now produce electricity from tears

A team of Irish scientists has discovered that applying pressure to a protein found in egg whites and tears can generate electricity. The researchers from the Bernal Institute, University of Limerick (UL), Ireland, observed that crystals of lysozyme, a model protein that is abundant in egg whites of birds as well as in the tears, saliva and milk of mammals can generate electricity when pressed. Their report is published today (October 2) in the journal, Applied Physics Letters.

The amount of electricity generated is negligible, but the emotional tension generated can produce strong emotional power.

New term for climate change in advance of Climate Week in NYC: “Existential threat”

The Climate Group Week in New York

attracts every Climate Change dork.

Global Governance bet.

“existential threat”

the Earth is not saved by more pork.

Thanks, Anthony Watts (wattsupwiththat.com) for pointing to this paper:

New climate risk classification created to account for potential ‘existential’ threats

Researchers identify a one-in-20 chance of temperature increase causing catastrophic damage or worse by 2050


A new study evaluating models of future climate scenarios has led to the creation of the new risk categories “catastrophic” and “unknown” to characterize the range of threats posed by rapid global warming. Researchers propose that unknown risks imply existential threats to the survival of humanity.

Well Under 2 Degrees Celsius:
Fast Action Policies to Protect People and the Planet from Extreme Climate Change
Report of the Committee to Prevent Extreme Climate Change
V. Ramanathan, M. L. Molina, and D. Zaelke
Published September, 2017
Prominently and up front is a diagram that is supposed to explain everything:
 If we look at the last curve in dotted line they explain everything
BL (CI – 80% & C feedback). They explain that BL beans baseline (whatever baseline they mean is not explained). Then CI – 80%?

What does CI mean?

From the free encyclopedia: The term is usually used within the law enforcement world, where they are officially known as confidential or criminal informants (CI), and can often refer pejoratively to the supply of information without the consent of the other parties with the intent of malicious, personal or financial gain.

Well, that explains a lot, no need to understand the rest.