Thomas Wikman – Page 11

Developed nations have successfully reduced carbon emissions

Super fact 42 : The developed nations (rich countries) have reduced their carbon emissions since the 1990’s despite continued GDP growth, even if we take offshore production into account. In addition, many developing countries have succeeded in reducing their emissions as well. Other fast-growing developing countries have flattened or at least slowed their increase in carbon emissions. Many countries have decoupled economic growth from CO2 emissions. In other words, we do not need to increase carbon emissions or burn more fossil fuels to grow the economy.

This is good news as well as a surprise to many people who falsely believe that to grow the economy (grow GDP) you need to burn more fossil fuels and an increase in carbon emissions is inevitable if you want to grow the economy. The data shows otherwise. This is important news that is difficult to believe in for many people. It is a super fact.

Carbon Emissions and GDP

In the past carbon emissions were strongly correlated with national wealth. The wealthier a nation was the higher its carbon emissions were and as the economy grew so did the carbon emissions. This has not been true since the 1990’s. The developed nations of the world have continued growing their GDP whilst reducing their carbon emissions.

You may think that the reason is that we shipped much of our manufacturing overseas and that if you consider the consumers in the importing country responsible for the overseas emissions this decoupling of GDP and emissions would disappear. But you would be wrong. Even if you make the consumers in the importing country responsible for the emissions during production in the exporting country the emissions have gone down. One example taken from this article in Our World in Data is the United Kingdom.

In the graph below for the UK the GDP (adjusted for inflation) grew by 53.26% between 1990 and 2023 and the emissions were reduced by 57.66%. If make UK consumers 100% responsible for the emissions in China and India, etc., caused by the production of goods imported to the UK the reduction until 2022 was 38.59%. That is not as much but it is still impressive and demonstrates the decoupling between GDP growth and carbon emissions.

The graph shows three plotted graphs, a dark blue one showing GDP per capita, a light blue one showing UK carbon emissions per capita and a red one showing trade adjusted carbon emissions per capita. The GDP graph is increasing by more than 50% over 33 years and the CO2 emissions per capita graph is decreasing by almost 60% and the trade adjusted carbon emissions decline by almost 40% | Developed nations have successfully reduced carbon emissions — **Data source**: Data compiled from multiple sources by World Bank (2025); Global Carbon Budget (2024); Population based on various sources (2024). **Note**: GDP per capita is expressed in international dollars at 2021 prices. Graph taken from Our World in Data.

The text in the graph above is difficult to read so I’ve copied it below in larger text:

Consumption-based emissions: Consumption-based emissions are national or regional emissions that have been adjusted for trade. They are calculated as domestic (or ‘production-based’ emissions) emissions minus the emissions generated in the production of goods and services that are exported to other countries or regions, plus emissions from the production of goods and services that are imported. Consumption-based emissions = Production-based – Exported + Imported emissions.
Fossil emissions: Fossil emissions measure the quantity of carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted from the burning of fossil fuels, and directly from industrial processes such as cement and steel production. Fossil CO2 includes emissions from coal, oil, gas, flaring, cement, steel, and other industrial processes. Fossil emissions do not include land use change, deforestation, soils, or vegetation.
International dollars: International dollars are a hypothetical currency that is used to make meaningful comparisons of monetary indicators of living standards. Figures expressed in constant international dollars are adjusted for inflation within countries over time, and for differences in the cost of living between countries. The goal of such adjustments is to provide a unit whose purchasing power is held fixed over time and across countries, such that one international dollar can buy the same quantity and quality of goods and service no matter where or when it is spent. Read more in our article: What are Purchasing Power Parity adjustments and why do we need them?

Below is the same type of graphs for the United Kingdom as well as France, Germany, Sweden, United States and Finland. The numbers for these countries are as follows:

United Kingdom: GDP growth 53.26%, CO2 emissions reduction 57.66%, trade adjusted CO2 emissions reduction 38.59%.
France: GDP growth 39.74%, CO2 emissions reduction 40.64%, trade adjusted CO2 emissions reduction 28.82%.
Germany: GDP growth 49.04%, CO2 emissions reduction 46.72%, trade adjusted CO2 emissions reduction 33.95%.
Sweden: GDP growth 56.00%, CO2 emissions reduction 48.45%, trade adjusted CO2 emissions reduction 34.75%.
United States: GDP growth 68.05%, CO2 emissions reduction 29.25%, trade adjusted CO2 emissions reduction 17.04%.
Finland: GDP growth 45.69%, CO2 emissions reduction 50.54%, trade adjusted CO2 emissions reduction 42.79%.

Note these are emissions reduction numbers per capita (growth for GDP) not carbon emissions per capita. For example, the United States has three to four times larger carbon emissions per capita as, for example, Sweden or France.

All these graphs show the same trends as the UK graph. — **Data source**: Data compiled from multiple sources by World Bank (2025); Global Carbon Budget (2024); Population based on various sources (2024). **Note**: GDP per capita is expressed in international dollars at 2021 prices. Graph taken from Our World in Data.

Many Countries Have Reduced Their Carbon Emissions

However, the story does not end with these six countries or even with the developed world. The 30 graphs below all demonstrate significant reductions in carbon emissions as GDP is growing, demonstrating a decoupling between GDP growth and carbon emissions. Note that Azerbaijan’s GDP grew by 93% as its carbon emissions was reduced by 7% (all carbon emissions below are adjusted for trade).

This is 30 small graphs featuring a blue and red line. The blue line shows GDP growth since 1990 and the red line carbon emissions since 1990. All blue lines point up and all red lines point down | Developed nations have successfully reduced carbon emissions — **Data sources**: Global Carbon Project & World Bank. There are more countries that achieved the same, but only those countries for which data is available and for which each exceeded 5% are shown. The graphs are from Our World in Data <<Link-1>>. All carbon emissions in the graphs above are adjusted for trade.

The World’s Carbon Emissions Per Capita Has Flattened

World GDP per capita has increased by 83.54% since 1990 while carbon emissions per capita have grown by 9.48%. That may not be as impressive but note two things. That is still a decoupling between economic growth and if you look in the graph, you’ll see that carbon emissions were higher in 2008 to 2019. The curve has flattened and gone down a bit. Global Warming caused by our burning of fossil fuels may be the greatest environmental challenge in recorded history, but we are slowly and steadily turning things around. We are not doing it fast enough to avoid major damage to our eco systems and perhaps civilization, but we are still turning things around. If you have any doubts about global warming / climate change or that we are causing it click here for a summary of the evidence.

The graph shows two graphs. The dark blue one shows GDP growth per capita and the light blue the carbon emissions per capita. — **Data source**: Data compiled from multiple sources by World Bank (2025); Global Carbon Budget (2024); Population based on various sources (2024). The graph is taken from Our World in Data <<Link-1>>.

China’s Carbon Emissions

One reason the world’s carbon emissions per capita have not been reduced much despite the fact that so many countries have reduced their emissions is that the world’s largest emitter China, has grown their carbon emissions steadily since 1990. Between 1990 and 2023 China’s GDP per capita (and adjusted for inflation) grew by 1,245.28% and their emissions grew by 288.43% per capita. Remember that China has 1.4 billion people so that is a big carbon blast for the world.

However, before you blame China too much remember that China’s carbon emissions per capita is less than that of the United States and that of many other developed countries, and the country with the largest cumulative carbon emissions is the United States. China’s economic growth has been immense, and its immense population of 1.4 billion people explains its huge impact on the world’s carbon emissions.

Fortunately, it now appears that China’s emissions have finally peaked.

To see the other Super Facts click here

Emissions of ozone-depleting gases have fallen by 99 Percent

Super fact 41 : Largely thanks to the Montreal Protocol in 1987 the emissions of ozone-depleting gases have fallen by more than 99%, 99.7% to be exact, according to Our World in Data. This has resulted in halting the expansion of the ozone holes and the reduction in emissions of ozone-depleting gases is saving millions of lives every year.

This is my good news for Earth Day, and it is a super fact. It is a super fact because a lot of people believe that the issue with ozone depleting gases and Montreal protocol is bunk. They take the fact that we are not talking about it much nowadays as evidence that there was nothing to it in the first place. However, they are wrong. We typically don’t talk much about environmental problems that have been addressed successfully. The Antarctic ozone hole that we used to worry about is still there, but its worrisome expansion has been halted.

The Reduction of Ozone-Depleting Gases

The ozone layer, located in the stratosphere, protects Earth from harmful UV radiation. Ozone (O3) is naturally created and destroyed in a balance, but ozone-depleting substances damage the ozone layer by releasing chlorine atoms that catalyze the destruction of ozone molecules.

This problem was discovered by Mario Molina and F. Sherwood Rowland in 1974. They were awarded the 1995 Nobel Prize in Chemistry, along with Paul Crutzen, for their work in atmospheric chemistry. Examples of ozone depleting gases are chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), halons, methyl chloroform ,methyl bromide, carbon tetrachloride, hydrobromofluorocarbons, and chlorobromomethane.

The picture shows the sun radiating UV radiation to earth, which is protected by a blanket of ozone | By 2018 the emissions of ozone-depleting gases had fallen by 99.7 percent — Ozone layer depletion diagram. Earth’s sunscreen, shielding us from the sun’s harmful ultraviolet rays. UV A, B, C. UVA, UVB, UVC.

Ozone depletion causes a breakdown of the ozone layer around the world, including the famous Arctic and Antarctic ozone holes. This allows more UV radiation to reach Earth surface, increasing the exposure to harmful ultraviolet (UV) radiation, which can cause skin cancer, cataracts, and immune system damage.

It also harms plants and marine life, as well as climate. It should be noted that this is a different problem from climate change or if you call it global warming, even though ozone depletion to some degree influence climate change. You can read about climate change related super facts here, here and here.

The Reduction of Ozone-Depleting Gases

The good news is that we have been very successful in reducing ozone depleting gases. The Montreal protocol, a landmark international agreement signed in 1987 to protect the Earth’s ozone layer by phasing out ozone depleting gases, has been very successful.

As you can see in the diagram below from Our World in Data. We have had at least a 99% reduction in ozone depleting gases according to the NASA, the World Economic Forum and the UN Environment Program. More specifically, the reduction is 99.7% by 2018 according to Our World in Data.

Gases visualized in the diagram are CFCs, Halons, HCFCs, Carbon Tetrachloride, Methyl Bromide, Methyl Chloroform. The diagram shows a peak around the end of 1980’s | By 2018 the emissions of ozone-depleting gases had fallen by 99.7 percent — The phase out of six ozone depleting gases. Data source UN Environment Program (2023).

443 million Cases of Skin Cancer Prevented

The NIH estimate that the Montreal Protocol has prevented 443 million cases of skin cancer, 2.3 million skin cancer deaths, and 63 million cases of cataracts in the United States alone. Globally, it is estimated that the Protocol has saved an estimated 2 million people from dying from skin cancer each year.

Yes, you can read that again :

Worldwide the Montreal Protocol has saved an estimated 2 million people from dying from skin cancer each year.

To read more about the Montreal Protocol and the ultimate repair job click here.

The Antarctic Ozone Hole

What about the Arctic and Antarctic ozone holes? Well, they are not gone but they are retreating. When there is an environmental problem, it does not entirely disappear right away even if you remove the root cause. The same is true for global warming. If we succeeded to stop all carbon emissions tomorrow it would take decades for average temperatures to stop rising and hundreds of years for them to come down to “normal”. But remember it would have been much worse without the Montreal Protocol.

There are two graphs. The graph representing the annual mean Antarctic ozone hole is blue. The graph representing the annual maximum Antarctic ozone hole is red. Both graphs are rising initially but after the year 2000 the graphs flatten and even go down a bit. — The graph is from Our World in Data and data comes from NASA Ozone watch 2024.

To see the other Super Facts click here

The Sunshine Blogger Award Is Rising Again

I’ve been nominated for the Sunshine Blogger Award a second time, this time by Pooja, from Lifesfinewhine. Thank you for the nomination, Pooja! It was a nice surprise.

The Sunshine Blogger Award Official Image — The Sunshine Blogger Award

Check out her blog for lots of great posts featuring blogging advice and expertise, beautiful poetry, short stories, thought provoking quotes and much more!

Without further ado, here are the rules which I’ve copied from Pooja’s blog:

Display the award’s official logo somewhere on your blog.
Thank the person who nominated you.
Provide a link to your nominator’s blog.
Answer your nominators’ questions.
Nominate up to 11 bloggers.
Ask your nominees 11 questions.
Notify your nominees by commenting on at least one of their blog posts.

Eleven Questions for Me

Below are my answers to Pooja’s eleven questions.

Question 1 : What’s your favorite animal?

Dogs, especially Leonberger dogs. I love dogs that are big or small. We’ve had a Labrador, a German Shepherd, a Leonberger, a Japanese Shin, a Pug and a mini-Australian Shepherd. I did not grow up with dogs. I learned to love them as an adult. Dogs are intelligent, they can understand hundreds of words, they are emotional, they are great communicators, they are loyal and loving. Dogs are the only animals capable of loving you more than they love themselves. Our Leonberger Bronco, or Le Bronco von der Löwenhöhle, was a very large dog. He was brave, confident, strong, and a great family dog.

A photo of our three months old Leonberger wearing a red scarf — Our Leonberger Bronco at the age of three months. He would grow to be 140lbs, and 167lbs when he was a bit overweight.

Bronco rescued hamsters and he saved our Pug’s life by stepping in between her and an attacking dog. He likely saved our Labrador’s life too by sniffing out an oncoming insulin shock. He chased off a trespasser and peeping Tom who was harassing my wife and other women in the neighborhood thereby saving the women in the neighborhood when police couldn’t. He was very funny and an amazing swimmer as well as a skilled counter surfer. I wrote a book about Bronco that you can find here.

The cover is light brown and featuring an old Leonberger dog. The title is The Life and Times of Le Bronco von der Löwenhöhle: Stories and Tips from Thirteen Years with a Leonberger. Author is Thomas Wikman. — The front cover of The Life and Times of Le Bronco von der Löwenhöhle: Stories and Tips from Thirteen Years with a Leonberger. Click on the picture to visit the Amazon page the book.

Question 2 : What TV show or movie do you wish you could watch for the first time again?

I think that might be Ex Machina. This was a movie about Artificial Intelligence embedded in a female robot. She displayed human feelings in many ways, but she was imprisoned, and she wanted to get out. She was a disaster in the making. The movie was very thought-provoking, scary on many levels, as well as full of social commentary. Because it featured several surprises it is the kind of movie that is difficult to watch too many times.

Question 3 : What’s one thing you love unironically?

My wife, my children, my dog, well, that’s many things.

Question 4 : What is your favorite dish to cook?

I don’t have a favorite dish to cook but I love to grill or barbecue chicken, meat, sausage, and drink a beer while I am doing it.

Question 5 : Share the one joke that always makes you laugh no matter how many times you hear it?

There are some jokes that have a thought-provoking aspect to them and those I can laugh at even if I’ve heard them before. An example, “How will Descartes feel when he finds out that people who don’t think exist too?”.

A picture of Descartes with the caption How will Descartes feel when he finds out that people who don’t think exist too? | The Sunshine Blogger Award

I also love dog jokes, even the silly simple ones. An example featuring our Pug Daisy and our mini-Australian Shepherd is shown below.

Daisy tells Rollo “Rollo do you want to hear a joke?”. Rollo says “OK”, Daisy says “Knock! Knock!”, and they both stars barking.

Question 6 : What was your favorite cartoon growing up?

I read a lot of French Belgian Bande Dessinée (in Swedish) when I was a kid. My favorite was Tintin and maybe Asterix. That goes for both the comic books as well as the animated movies.

Question 7 : You get to bring three items to a desert island. What are they?

A knife. A gun needs ammunition and cannot be used for a lot of practical things. However, you can use a knife for a very long time. In addition, you can turn it into a spear and use it as a tool and use it to prepare a fire.
A hard bottle, or another sort of vessel, for carrying water or digging.
A reverse osmosis filter for removing salt from sea water.

Question 8 : What’s your go-to karaoke song?

I’ve only sang Karaoke a few times and I don’t remember what songs I picked, so I don’t have a go-to karaoke song. However, if I ever do Karaoke again, I think I will sing “Nothing Else Matters” by Metallica.

Question 9 : Are you more of a “stay in and binge-watch” person or “go out and explore” person?

I love nature and I love the outside world. However, Dallas, where I live, does not offer a lot of opportunities for that so I might stay inside and watch TV. When I am in the countryside, or where there is a forest, mountains, or beeches, or in a beautiful city like Paris, Stockholm, or Copenhagen, I go out and explore.

Question 10 : What’s your useless superpower?

My most useless superpower is pointing out to people when they are getting their facts wrong. You would think they would appreciate the learning opportunity, but no, they often get annoyed.

Question 11 : What’s the weirdest compliment you’ve ever received?

My dog gives me an implicit compliment when he sits outside the bathroom door and waits for me. He shows that he wants to be with me, but it is a little weird.

Our dog Rollo’s dark brown hair is visible under the white bathroom door | The Sunshine Blogger Award — Rollo’s fur sticking out underneath the bathroom door. He is waiting for me to come back out.

Here are my questions for my nominees:

Question 1 : What’s your favorite book?

Question 2 : What’s your ultimate comfort food?

Question 3 : What’s your favorite season and why?

Question 4 : Do you recharge better alone or with others?

Question 5 : What’s one adventure or trip that changed you?

Question 6 : What’s something you used to believe that you’ve changed your mind about?

Question 7 : What’s something you’ve learned about yourself in the past year?

Question 8 : What’s the weirdest or most random fact you know?

Question 9 : What’s a risk you’re glad you took?

Question 10 : What’s the best piece of advice you’ve ever received?

Question 11 : What kind of legacy do you want to leave behind?

Eleven New Victims

Below are my nominees. Naturally, whether you participate or not is entirely up to you. I do not have any expectations, and I fully understand if you are not up to it.

Susana Cabaço, Spiritual Insights & Personal Empowerment

John Howell, Fiction Favorites

Pete Springer, teacher and author

Violet Lentz from Thru Violet’s Lentz

Jan Sikes, Award winning Texas author

Laura Stamps from Dog Dazed

Ada Jenkins from The Introverted Bookworm

Joanne Macco, Anything is Possible with Love, Hope, and Perseverance

Darlene Foster from Darlene Foster’s Blog

Carol Ann Taylor from Carol Cooks2

The Mindful Mystic from the Wild Pomegranate Tree

To see the Super Facts click here

Time Dilation Goes Both Ways

Super fact 38 : If two observers are moving compared to each other both will observe the other’s time as being slower. In other words, both observers will observe the other’s clocks as ticking slower. Time slowing down is referred to as Time Dilation. And this post is about how time dilation goes both ways.

A lot of people know that if someone moves very fast his clocks will run slower. That’s relativity. If someone speeds through space in a rocket ship, close to the speed of light his time will slow down. When one hour passes on earth only half an hour may pass in the rocket. What comes as a shock to many people is when they find out that the converse is also true. When one hour passes in the rocket only half an hour will pass on earth.

Clearly that looks like a contradiction, but there is an explanation. I consider this a super fact because it is so strange and almost impossible for people to believe, and yet it is true.

The image shows two clocks side by side. On the left is a wall clock and on the right a wristwatch | Time Dilation Goes Both Ways — The guy on earth says my clock (left) is ticking double as fast as the rocket man’s clock (right). The rocket man say’s my clock (right) is ticking double as fast as the clock on earth (left). Who is right? Surprisingly both of them.

Postulates of Special Relativity

The two postulates of special relativity are:

The laws of physics are the same in all inertial frames of reference. An inertial frame is a system that moves at a constant velocity.
The speed of light in a vacuum is constant for all observers, regardless of the motion of the light source.

The first postulate is called the principle of relativity and goes all the way back to Galileo Galilei. It means that no experiment can determine whether you are at rest or moving at a constant velocity. The reciprocity of time dilation follows from this postulate. If the time for the rocket man in the example above was ticking at half the speed compared to the time for the guy on earth and they both agreed, then you could tell who was standing still and who was moving from that fact.

The first postulate demands that they disagree. The guy on earth thinks the rocket man’s clock is ticking at half the speed of his own clock, whilst the rocket man think it is earth man’s clock that is going slow. Therefore, you can’t tell who is standing still, which is what the first postulate requires.

The second postulate is the more shocking one and is special to relativity. It was discovered experimentally at the end of the 19^th century but was too difficult for scientists to accept at first so various ad hoc explanations were put forth to explain it away, until the theories of relativity were created. I designated this postulate as my super fact #4 and you can read about it here.

The picture shows two people Alan and Amy. Alan is on the ground. Amy is flying by Alan in a rocket speeding left. Both Alan and Amy are pointing lasers to the left | Time Dilation Goes Both Ways — In this picture Amy is traveling past Alan in a rocket. Both have a laser. Both measure the speed of both laser beams to be c = 299,792,458 meters per second. The speed of light is a universal constant.

Time Dilation

In the pictures below I am showing two rocket systems in space, Amy’s rocket and Alan’s rocket. They are travelling at a high speed compared to each other. Each rocket has a light clock that consists of a light beam bouncing up and down between a mirror in the ceiling and a mirror on the floor. The two light clocks are identical, and each bounce corresponds to a microsecond.

Amy is passing Alan at a high speed, and therefore Alan will see Amy’s light clock running slower than his because Amy’s light beam must travel further. Remember, the speed of light is identical for both light clocks (light speed is a universal constant). For those interested I am also deriving the formula for time dilation.

The picture shows two systems, each with a clock consisting of light beams bouncing between mirrors. In this set up Alan is stationary compared to us and therefore his light beam only moves vertically. — Alan and Amy have identical light clocks. We call the time it takes for the light beam to go from the floor to the ceiling (one clock tick) Dt in Amy’s case and Dt’ (reference frame) for Alan. Amy is speeding past Alan towards the left. From Alan’s perspective Amy’s clock is running slower. Using Pythagoras theorem, it is possible to derive the formula for time dilation shown in the lower left corner.

Since Amy moving left is the same as Amy standing still and Alan moving right you can say that Alan is the one moving fast. In this case it is Alan’s light clock that is ticking slower because from this viewpoint it is his light beam that has to travel further. From Amy’s perspective it is Alan’s clock that is going slower.

The picture shows two systems, each with a clock consisting of light beams bouncing between mirrors. In this set up Amy is stationary compared to us and therefore her light beam only moves vertically | Time Dilation Goes Both Ways — It is equally correct to say that Amy is standing still and that it is Alan that is moving fast to the right. This time (pun not intended) it is Alan’s clock that is ticking slower. Dt corresponds to Alan’s clock ticks and Amy’s clock ticks are Dt’.

This seemingly contradictory situation is resolved by the fact that Amy’s and Alan’s perspectives will drift apart as they continue their journey. They will increasingly disagree on whether events are simultaneous or not, and they will disagree in which order events occur. This is another shocking fact, or as I refer to it, super fact. It is strange but it resolves the apparent contradiction of reciprocal time dilation. I am explaining this in greater detail in this post.

The Twin Paradox

But what happens if one of Amy or Alan decides to turn around so that they meet up again. If Amy’s clock runs slower from Alan’s perspective and Alan’s clock runs slower from Amy’s perspective, how can you reconcile that when they meet up again? It turns out that whoever is turning around or accelerating or decelerating to turn back is the one who will have the least time pass. If Amy is the one turning back, then she will age less than Alan. During her acceleration she will see Alan’s clock starting to run faster and faster until he is older her.

Let say Alan’s clock is running half the speed of Amy’s clock from Amy’s perspective and Amy’s clock is running half the speed of Alan’s clock from Alan’s perspective. Let’s also say that Amy traveled to the left for 10 years before turning around.

From Alan’s perspective she would have traveled 20 years before turning around. However, from Amy’s perspective 5 years would have passed on Alan’s clock. As she turns around Alan’s clock will run faster and catch up so that when they meet up again Amy will be aged 20 years, while Alan will be aged 40 years. That is 35 years of catching up for Alan’s clock from Amy’s perspective. Alan’s clock advanced 35 years from Amy’s perspective after Amy turned around. In the end Amy will be the younger one.

The picture shows Amy on the left turning around and Alan on the right. Text explains what happens | Time Dilation Goes Both Ways — Observe that the fast-forward advancement of Alan’s clock from Amy’s perspective happens only while Amy is in the process of turning around (accelerating / decelerating). Further, how fast the fast forward happens depends on the distance as well. Once Amy is traveling at a constant speed again (inertial frame) Alan’s clock will run slower again from Amy’s perspective.

A somewhat halting but OK analogy for the 35 years of catching up that happens on Alan’s clock from Amy’s perspective is when you turn a boat around on a wavy sea. As you are moving in the direction of the waves the waves will hit you much less often (if at all) but after you turn around and move against them the waves will hit your boat very frequently. Alan’s clock will run faster for Amy whilst she is turning around.

Book Recommendations on Relativity

Relativity Visualized by Lewis Carrol Epstein. This book does not require much education in physics and very little math, and yet it explains relativity very well.
Relativity, The Special and the General Theory, by Albert Einstein. In my opinion, not the best overall, but it is easy reading for the public and the chapter on the relativity of simultaneity is pretty good.
Quantum Physics of Atoms, Molecules, Solids, Nuclei and Particles by Robert Eisberg and Robert Resnick. An advanced but excellent explanation of special relativity in the appendix.
The Special Theory of Relativity by David Bohm. It is written for people with some physics education. However, it is one of the best books on Special Relativity that I’ve read.
Einstein’s Miraculous Year. This book features the translations of the five famous papers that Albert Einstein wrote in 1905 including “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies”, which was his paper on Special Relativity. Not for the faint of heart but very interesting.

To see the other Super Facts click here

ERCOT Fuel Mix

This is not a super fact but just interesting information about ERCOT. ERCOT or the Electric Reliability Council of Texas is the organization that manages the state’s electricity grid, ensuring reliability and it operates the competitive wholesale electricity market for 90% of Texas’s electric load. There are a few things that are important to remember about ERCOT.

The ERCOT grid is located solely within the state of Texas and is not interconnected to the rest of the United States. In addition to Texans being independent, this is a way of avoiding federal regulation. ERCOT is regulated by the Texas Public Utility Commission while the rest of the country is regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).
ERCOT is an ISO (independent system operator), meaning it’s a non-profit organization that manages the electricity grid independently of any single utility company.
When companies sell their energy (to ERCOT) it works like a continuous auction. The one with the lowest price is picked first and allowed to contribute with whatever they are able to and also, of course, considering what the grid-powerlines can carry safely.

A power grid. The sun is setting in the background | ERCOT Fuel Mix — The power grid carries the power and if not sufficient it can be a major bottle neck. Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

Renewables are successful in Texas

One thing that surprises many people is that renewable energy, for example, wind and solar, is quite successful in Texas. Fossil fuels is important in Texas, and there are many powerful oil and gas billionaires in Texas who fight the expansion of renewables. Texas politicians work hard to create laws that punish renewables with discriminatory permitting requirements.

For example, a recent bill in the Texas Senate SB819 adds a lot of requirements on renewables and battery storage that does not apply to fossil fuel-based energy sources. An example is the requirement in SB819 that wind turbines must be at least half a mile away from the property line of any neighboring property whilst, for example, oil rigs can be built up to the property line. There are a lot more regulations in SB819 that are discriminatory, contrary to free market principes, and even violations of private property rights.

Despite all the obstacles set up against renewable energy in Texas renewable energy is on the march in Texas. The reason is that ERCOT is ultimately a price competitive free market-based system and renewables are cheap. Solar and wind are the cheapest even considering subsidies and the cost of construction, land rent, disposal, and other costs not directly caused by electricity generation are taken into consideration disposal. Click here for details. The graph below shows the evolution of different energy sources in Texas. The graph is taken from this link provided by Dr. Joshua Rhodes, a research scientist at UT Austin.

The graph shows the average annual mix for natural gas, coal, wind, nuclear, solar, and other sources. Natural has roughly remained around 40-50%, coal has shrunk from 37% to 13%, wind has grown from 2% to 24%, nuclear has shrunk from 14% to 8%, and solar has grown from nothing to 10% over the last five years | ERCOT Fuel Mix — The ERCOT fuel mix from 2006 to 2024. Notice the expansion of wind power and notice that solar has gone from nothing to 10% of the average fuel mix in five years. The graph is taken from this link.

You can read more about the evolution of renewable energy in Texas by clicking here.

Watching the ERCOT Fuel Mix in Real Time

Finally, what I think is the most interesting portion of this post, the real-time ERCOT Fuel Mix. It includes a couple of energy sources not mentioned earlier in this post, hydro and power storage.

Hydro is very small in Texas and power storage is a new item that is not a true energy source but a feature that can be called upon when energy is suddenly needed somewhere. It is still not widely used but it reached 10% of the mix at one point in 2024. It is likely an energy source that will keep growing as it is instant and scalable. It is the most dispatchable energy source of all. I can add that there is a lot of misinformation spread about renewable energy, especially about wind power. To read more about that click here.

Last evening and today I took several screen shots of the real time ERCOT fuel mix (see below). A couple of things to note are that solar does not contribute at night and wind contributes more at night. It was a very cloudy and rainy day today so solar contributed less than normal during daytime, but not a lot less. It is not much less than the typical sunny day of 20%. It is true that wind and solar are intermittent, but it does not matter a whole lot because wind contributes more at night when solar does not contribute and battery storage, the most dispatchable energy source of all, is growing in importance.

Click here to watch the real-time ERCOT Fuel Mix minute by minute anytime you like. (highly recommended).