Tim Cook confirms Apple will use TMSC chips made in Arizona

Posted:
in General Discussion edited December 2022
After Apple supplier TSMC announced it would increase its Arizona investment, Apple CEO Tim Cook confirmed that the company would use chips built in the state.

Apple CEO Tim Cook
Apple CEO Tim Cook


In November, Cook made it clear that Apple will source at least some of its chip supply from the still-unfinished TSMC plant in Arizona. He reiterated the stance Tuesday at an event in Arizona, according to CNBC.

"Today is only the beginning," Cook said. "Today we're combining TSMC's expertise with the unrivaled ingenuity of American workers. We are investing in a stronger, brighter future, we are planting our seed in the Arizona desert. And at Apple, we are proud to help nurture its growth."

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company is the largest chip foundry company in the world and commands over half of the global market share. It produces advanced processors for iPhones, iPads, and Macs.

"And now, thanks to the hard work of so many people, these chips can be proudly stamped Made in America," Cook said. "This is an incredibly significant moment."

Roughly one-third of the plant capacity in Arizona will be for Apple. The plant's previous capacity was about 20,000 wafers, each containing multiple chips.

Another report on Tuesday says that TSMC will build additional facilities in Arizona. The first plant will start production in 2024, and the supplier has already started construction of a second fab that will begin manufacturing using 3-nanometer process technology in 2026.

The US government will partially subsidize the cost of the Arizona factories. In early 2022, President Biden signed the CHIPS and Science Act into law, which includes billions of dollars in incentives for chip manufacturers to bring production to the United States.

Read on AppleInsider
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 26
    freediverxfreediverx Posts: 1,423member
    Leaked photo of Arizona chip prototype.

    elijahgroyboymuthuk_vanalingamAnilu_777DAalsethdewme
  • Reply 2 of 26
    Will these chips be made in Arizona, shipped to China or India or Vietnam, put into iPhones or iPads or Macs and those products then shipped to the purchaser?

    Not a very environment friendly solution.
  • Reply 3 of 26
    rob53rob53 Posts: 3,091member
    WilliamM said:
    Will these chips be made in Arizona, shipped to China or India or Vietnam, put into iPhones or iPads or Macs and those products then shipped to the purchaser?

    Not a very environment friendly solution.
    Sounds about right. Get ready for higher costs and delays once the chips are made in America. Only way to keep these chips in the USA is for Apple to have an assembler located here which would really increase the costs and might reduce the build quality along with delays caused by lack of workforce and strikes. 
    nzugwc
  • Reply 4 of 26
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 2,919member
    WilliamM said:
    Will these chips be made in Arizona, shipped to China or India or Vietnam, put into iPhones or iPads or Macs and those products then shipped to the purchaser?

    Not a very environment friendly solution.
    Based on what’s publicly known now, that seems like a reasonable guess. 

    But it’s not hard to imagine scenarios that are different from that, and if such scenarios were to unfold they would definitely involve facts not currently in evidence.

    for example, Mexican labor is now cheaper than Chinese labor, so assembling in Mexico might make sense. 
  • Reply 5 of 26
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,341member
    WilliamM said:
    Will these chips be made in Arizona, shipped to China or India or Vietnam, put into iPhones or iPads or Macs and those products then shipped to the purchaser?

    Not a very environment friendly solution.
    When it comes to the supply chain nobody gives a rat’s ass about the environment, least of all Tim Cook. The public has been clamoring to bring the supply chain back, hopefully with jobs. It’s coming back. What’s your problem? I’m being sarcastic about this because it’s a no win, damned if you do, damned if you don’t proposition. As far as the environment goes China is bringing more coal fired power plants online to supply electricity to the factories that make the devices we in the West crave and can’t live without.
  • Reply 6 of 26
    As an American and an Apple stockholder, I am glad to hear this.  We need to do more to be independent o Communist regimes.
  • Reply 7 of 26
    DAalsethDAalseth Posts: 2,583member
    WilliamM said:
    Will these chips be made in Arizona, shipped to China or India or Vietnam, put into iPhones or iPads or Macs and those products then shipped to the purchaser?

    Not a very environment friendly solution.
    At first. Remember this comes on the heals of Apple announcing that t’s moving more of it’s assembly out of China. This os a long process that will take some years. I would not be surprised of some manufacturing comes back to North America, not next year, not immediately, but eventually. Once price and quality can be maintained. This is an evolutionary process, and there will likely need some components and sub assemblies from overseas for a couple of decades. But this is a step. 
  • Reply 8 of 26
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 1,821member
    lkrupp said:
    WilliamM said:
    Will these chips be made in Arizona, shipped to China or India or Vietnam, put into iPhones or iPads or Macs and those products then shipped to the purchaser?

    Not a very environment friendly solution.
    When it comes to the supply chain nobody gives a rat’s ass about the environment, least of all Tim Cook. The public has been clamoring to bring the supply chain back, hopefully with jobs. It’s coming back. What’s your problem? I’m being sarcastic about this because it’s a no win, damned if you do, damned if you don’t proposition. As far as the environment goes China is bringing more coal fired power plants online to supply electricity to the factories that make the devices we in the West crave and can’t live without.
    Short term.  China is also more foresighted than most of the West.  They’re investing heavily in nuclear. Both new tech as well as like a billion new power plants.  Takes time for them to come online but the coal power plants will be gone at some point in the future.  
  • Reply 9 of 26
    thttht Posts: 4,725member
    As an American and an Apple stockholder, I am glad to hear this.  We need to do more to be independent o Communist regimes.
    Reminder that Taiwan is a democracy. Both TSMC and FOXCONN/Hon Hai are Taiwanese. International conglomerates with plants in multiples countries.

    Western countries messed up, all those years ago, in not recognizing Taiwan and having formal diplomatic relations, but in practice, Taiwan acts and operates as an independent country from China proper. If it wasn't, China would have taken them over already and various western nations would not be saying they will help Taiwan defend itself from a Chinese invasion.

    After a century of modern warfare, you'd think dictactors, fascists, authoritarians and leaders of democracies would realise you can't occupy any country who doesn't want to be occupied and who have some sufficiently advanced other country feeding them weapons.
    edited December 2022 jcs2305nzugwcchadbag
  • Reply 10 of 26
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,341member
    chadbag said:
    lkrupp said:
    WilliamM said:
    Will these chips be made in Arizona, shipped to China or India or Vietnam, put into iPhones or iPads or Macs and those products then shipped to the purchaser?

    Not a very environment friendly solution.
    When it comes to the supply chain nobody gives a rat’s ass about the environment, least of all Tim Cook. The public has been clamoring to bring the supply chain back, hopefully with jobs. It’s coming back. What’s your problem? I’m being sarcastic about this because it’s a no win, damned if you do, damned if you don’t proposition. As far as the environment goes China is bringing more coal fired power plants online to supply electricity to the factories that make the devices we in the West crave and can’t live without.
    Short term.  China is also more foresighted than most of the West.  They’re investing heavily in nuclear. Both new tech as well as like a billion new power plants.  Takes time for them to come online but the coal power plants will be gone at some point in the future.  
    Oh wow, another CCP propagandist shows their face. Give us a freakin’ break.
  • Reply 11 of 26
    A few years high-tech world is dreaming of IoT. Can US lead IoT to doom? Morris Chang said so. 
  • Reply 12 of 26
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 1,821member
    lkrupp said:
    chadbag said:
    lkrupp said:
    WilliamM said:
    Will these chips be made in Arizona, shipped to China or India or Vietnam, put into iPhones or iPads or Macs and those products then shipped to the purchaser?

    Not a very environment friendly solution.
    When it comes to the supply chain nobody gives a rat’s ass about the environment, least of all Tim Cook. The public has been clamoring to bring the supply chain back, hopefully with jobs. It’s coming back. What’s your problem? I’m being sarcastic about this because it’s a no win, damned if you do, damned if you don’t proposition. As far as the environment goes China is bringing more coal fired power plants online to supply electricity to the factories that make the devices we in the West crave and can’t live without.
    Short term.  China is also more foresighted than most of the West.  They’re investing heavily in nuclear. Both new tech as well as like a billion new power plants.  Takes time for them to come online but the coal power plants will be gone at some point in the future.  
    Oh wow, another CCP propagandist shows their face. Give us a freakin’ break.
    Lol.  I’m very anti CCP and anti China (under CCP — nothing against the people).  Bringing up unfortunate facts that shows how short sighted the west is does not make one a CCP propagandist.   I am very critical of
    countries outsourcing to China, bowing to China, etc. 

    But they’re not stupid and we need to recognize that.  They (China) are going full steam ahead on nuclear energy and will win the economic race while we are messing around with “renewables” which will never be more than a distraction. 
    edited December 2022 dewme
  • Reply 13 of 26
    thttht Posts: 4,725member
    chadbag said:
    lkrupp said:
    chadbag said:
    lkrupp said:
    WilliamM said:
    Will these chips be made in Arizona, shipped to China or India or Vietnam, put into iPhones or iPads or Macs and those products then shipped to the purchaser?

    Not a very environment friendly solution.
    When it comes to the supply chain nobody gives a rat’s ass about the environment, least of all Tim Cook. The public has been clamoring to bring the supply chain back, hopefully with jobs. It’s coming back. What’s your problem? I’m being sarcastic about this because it’s a no win, damned if you do, damned if you don’t proposition. As far as the environment goes China is bringing more coal fired power plants online to supply electricity to the factories that make the devices we in the West crave and can’t live without.
    Short term.  China is also more foresighted than most of the West.  They’re investing heavily in nuclear. Both new tech as well as like a billion new power plants.  Takes time for them to come online but the coal power plants will be gone at some point in the future.  
    Oh wow, another CCP propagandist shows their face. Give us a freakin’ break.
    Lol.  I’m very anti CCP and anti China (under CCP — nothing against the people).  Bringing up unfortunate facts that shows how short sighted the west is does not make one a CCP propagandist.   I am very critical of
    countries outsourcing to China, bowing to China, etc. 

    But they’re not stupid and we need to recognize that.  They (China) are going full steam ahead on nuclear energy and will win the economic race while we are messing around with “renewables” which will never be more than a distraction. 
    China's advantage is their 1.4b people. That's a lot of labor that could be called upon with the right set of programs and incentives. It's also their biggest liability. That's a lot of people to keep happy, a lot of people to feed. Can you imagine 5x more people in the USA? Or 5x more people in Europe? There's going to be consequences. There's going to be a huge technology program just to manage the food, water, and environment to address that. 

    The type of energy technology is basically irrelevant. If anything, they started their nuclear power program about 10 years too late. There's going to be a good chance that those nuclear plants are going to be stranded assets because they will be too expensive to run. Renewables+storage will be 5x cheaper to run than nuclear in another 10 to 20 years.

    Moreover, electricity will be a collection of connected micro-grids in the future, with every household, every neighborhood, every business, being independent of the grid+utility. The biggest purpose of the grid may just be as a vehicle to buy and sell energy. That's basically the only thing I can see keeping an electric grid that connects everything going.

    When EVs have vehicle-to-grid as a default feature, another 10 years down the road, that's when the shit hits the fan with the utility. EV V2G, even cheaper solar panels, and long term storage are going to change the entire energy economy and infrastructure.
  • Reply 14 of 26
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,825member
    tht said:
    chadbag said:
    lkrupp said:
    chadbag said:
    lkrupp said:
    WilliamM said:
    Will these chips be made in Arizona, shipped to China or India or Vietnam, put into iPhones or iPads or Macs and those products then shipped to the purchaser?

    Not a very environment friendly solution.
    When it comes to the supply chain nobody gives a rat’s ass about the environment, least of all Tim Cook. The public has been clamoring to bring the supply chain back, hopefully with jobs. It’s coming back. What’s your problem? I’m being sarcastic about this because it’s a no win, damned if you do, damned if you don’t proposition. As far as the environment goes China is bringing more coal fired power plants online to supply electricity to the factories that make the devices we in the West crave and can’t live without.
    Short term.  China is also more foresighted than most of the West.  They’re investing heavily in nuclear. Both new tech as well as like a billion new power plants.  Takes time for them to come online but the coal power plants will be gone at some point in the future.  
    Oh wow, another CCP propagandist shows their face. Give us a freakin’ break.
    Lol.  I’m very anti CCP and anti China (under CCP — nothing against the people).  Bringing up unfortunate facts that shows how short sighted the west is does not make one a CCP propagandist.   I am very critical of
    countries outsourcing to China, bowing to China, etc. 

    But they’re not stupid and we need to recognize that.  They (China) are going full steam ahead on nuclear energy and will win the economic race while we are messing around with “renewables” which will never be more than a distraction. 
    China's advantage is their 1.4b people. That's a lot of labor that could be called upon with the right set of programs and incentives. It's also their biggest liability. That's a lot of people to keep happy, a lot of people to feed. Can you imagine 5x more people in the USA? Or 5x more people in Europe? There's going to be consequences. There's going to be a huge technology program just to manage the food, water, and environment to address that. 

    The type of energy technology is basically irrelevant. If anything, they started their nuclear power program about 10 years too late. There's going to be a good chance that those nuclear plants are going to be stranded assets because they will be too expensive to run. Renewables+storage will be 5x cheaper to run than nuclear in another 10 to 20 years.

    Moreover, electricity will be a collection of connected micro-grids in the future, with every household, every neighborhood, every business, being independent of the grid+utility. The biggest purpose of the grid may just be as a vehicle to buy and sell energy. That's basically the only thing I can see keeping an electric grid that connects everything going.

    When EVs have vehicle-to-grid as a default feature, another 10 years down the road, that's when the shit hits the fan with the utility. EV V2G, even cheaper solar panels, and long term storage are going to change the entire energy economy and infrastructure.
    Yeah, not so much.

    https://twitter.com/peterzeihan/status/1444294495722524675

    It appears that China has over counted its population, distorting the data on its birth rate over the last two decades. This leads to one of the very worst case scenarios of a working age population supporting the economy. After that, expect China's population to halve, perhaps as soon as 2050, with China never having "gotten rich before it got old", and never supplanting the U.S. as the World's largest economy. China is likely to be at 750 million while immigration to the U.S. continues to increase our population.

    On top of that, there is a retrenchment in the Global economy, driven as much by reaction to Xi's failing policies as by U.S. increasing isolationism. which is why TSMC has been lured to North America; as insurance against an invasion of Taiwan.

    None of what you predict for the electrical grid is going to happen. If anything, the U.S. is going to "get religion" and buildout a modern grid, that allows power generated in the Southwest, as an example, to be available during twilight hours of the East Coast, reducing the need for stored power, and the reverse of that for the West waking up.

  • Reply 15 of 26
    thttht Posts: 4,725member
    tmay said:
    tht said:
    chadbag said:
    lkrupp said:
    chadbag said:
    lkrupp said:
    WilliamM said:
    Will these chips be made in Arizona, shipped to China or India or Vietnam, put into iPhones or iPads or Macs and those products then shipped to the purchaser?

    Not a very environment friendly solution.
    When it comes to the supply chain nobody gives a rat’s ass about the environment, least of all Tim Cook. The public has been clamoring to bring the supply chain back, hopefully with jobs. It’s coming back. What’s your problem? I’m being sarcastic about this because it’s a no win, damned if you do, damned if you don’t proposition. As far as the environment goes China is bringing more coal fired power plants online to supply electricity to the factories that make the devices we in the West crave and can’t live without.
    Short term.  China is also more foresighted than most of the West.  They’re investing heavily in nuclear. Both new tech as well as like a billion new power plants.  Takes time for them to come online but the coal power plants will be gone at some point in the future.  
    Oh wow, another CCP propagandist shows their face. Give us a freakin’ break.
    Lol.  I’m very anti CCP and anti China (under CCP — nothing against the people).  Bringing up unfortunate facts that shows how short sighted the west is does not make one a CCP propagandist.   I am very critical of
    countries outsourcing to China, bowing to China, etc. 

    But they’re not stupid and we need to recognize that.  They (China) are going full steam ahead on nuclear energy and will win the economic race while we are messing around with “renewables” which will never be more than a distraction. 
    China's advantage is their 1.4b people. That's a lot of labor that could be called upon with the right set of programs and incentives. It's also their biggest liability. That's a lot of people to keep happy, a lot of people to feed. Can you imagine 5x more people in the USA? Or 5x more people in Europe? There's going to be consequences. There's going to be a huge technology program just to manage the food, water, and environment to address that. 

    The type of energy technology is basically irrelevant. If anything, they started their nuclear power program about 10 years too late. There's going to be a good chance that those nuclear plants are going to be stranded assets because they will be too expensive to run. Renewables+storage will be 5x cheaper to run than nuclear in another 10 to 20 years.

    Moreover, electricity will be a collection of connected micro-grids in the future, with every household, every neighborhood, every business, being independent of the grid+utility. The biggest purpose of the grid may just be as a vehicle to buy and sell energy. That's basically the only thing I can see keeping an electric grid that connects everything going.

    When EVs have vehicle-to-grid as a default feature, another 10 years down the road, that's when the shit hits the fan with the utility. EV V2G, even cheaper solar panels, and long term storage are going to change the entire energy economy and infrastructure.
    Yeah, not so much.

    https://twitter.com/peterzeihan/status/1444294495722524675

    It appears that China has over counted its population, distorting the data on its birth rate over the last two decades. This leads to one of the very worst case scenarios of a working age population supporting the economy. After that, expect China's population to halve, perhaps as soon as 2050, with China never having "gotten rich before it got old", and never supplanting the U.S. as the World's largest economy. China is likely to be at 750 million while immigration to the U.S. continues to increase our population.

    On top of that, there is a retrenchment in the Global economy, driven as much by reaction to Xi's failing policies as by U.S. increasing isolationism. which is why TSMC has been lured to North America; as insurance against an invasion of Taiwan.

    None of what you predict for the electrical grid is going to happen. If anything, the U.S. is going to "get religion" and buildout a modern grid, that allows power generated in the Southwest, as an example, to be available during twilight hours of the East Coast, reducing the need for stored power, and the reverse of that for the West waking up.

    From the Twitter thread you linked, from Peter Zeihan's tweets themselves: "The newer data suggests China's population will peak somewhere between 2050 and 2070." That means China's population is increasing until 2050 and will perhaps continue to do so out 2070. Be mindful that this is all just estimates on existing birth and death rates, and when Zeihan expects the crossover between birth rate and death rate to occur. 

    That time frame is entirely dependent on what China does. There definitely needs to be a food and water development program to sustain population growth as the extraction of China's natural resources, heck the world's native and wild resources, is nearing its end. There is only so much resources, land and animals to extract. So vertical farming, agrivoltaics, artificial meat, closed-loop water systems, some type of mechanized aquaculture, whatever will increase production will need to be done to sustain.

    Global warming does mean people will be migrating towards the poles. For China, Mongolia's and Siberia's low population density is surely looking tempting right now. You have to question how all this is going to work when there are billions wanting to move there, and Mongolia and Russia are sovereign nations. China can probably maintain in 4° to 6° F world though. It's not going to be pretty though.

    For electrical grid, I think the trends are not good for the existing electricity economic structure. Independence from the electrical grid is in sight, and it will be cheaper than the cost of using the grid. It's just solar and storage. PV will get cheaper. EVs will get cheaper. People will be able to make their own gas from solar power for long term storage or use some other method. When this crossover happens, the shit is going to hit the fan. I'm not sure how the grid can be funded, other than as a tax on commerce with energy units across microgrids and generators.

    Eventually, even water may be independent from the utility. That will probably be the last thing, but closed loop water recycling with the occasional replenishment will be coming. Not close, maybe 50 to 100 years.
  • Reply 16 of 26
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,825member
    tht said:
    tmay said:
    tht said:
    chadbag said:
    lkrupp said:
    chadbag said:
    lkrupp said:
    WilliamM said:
    Will these chips be made in Arizona, shipped to China or India or Vietnam, put into iPhones or iPads or Macs and those products then shipped to the purchaser?

    Not a very environment friendly solution.
    When it comes to the supply chain nobody gives a rat’s ass about the environment, least of all Tim Cook. The public has been clamoring to bring the supply chain back, hopefully with jobs. It’s coming back. What’s your problem? I’m being sarcastic about this because it’s a no win, damned if you do, damned if you don’t proposition. As far as the environment goes China is bringing more coal fired power plants online to supply electricity to the factories that make the devices we in the West crave and can’t live without.
    Short term.  China is also more foresighted than most of the West.  They’re investing heavily in nuclear. Both new tech as well as like a billion new power plants.  Takes time for them to come online but the coal power plants will be gone at some point in the future.  
    Oh wow, another CCP propagandist shows their face. Give us a freakin’ break.
    Lol.  I’m very anti CCP and anti China (under CCP — nothing against the people).  Bringing up unfortunate facts that shows how short sighted the west is does not make one a CCP propagandist.   I am very critical of
    countries outsourcing to China, bowing to China, etc. 

    But they’re not stupid and we need to recognize that.  They (China) are going full steam ahead on nuclear energy and will win the economic race while we are messing around with “renewables” which will never be more than a distraction. 
    China's advantage is their 1.4b people. That's a lot of labor that could be called upon with the right set of programs and incentives. It's also their biggest liability. That's a lot of people to keep happy, a lot of people to feed. Can you imagine 5x more people in the USA? Or 5x more people in Europe? There's going to be consequences. There's going to be a huge technology program just to manage the food, water, and environment to address that. 

    The type of energy technology is basically irrelevant. If anything, they started their nuclear power program about 10 years too late. There's going to be a good chance that those nuclear plants are going to be stranded assets because they will be too expensive to run. Renewables+storage will be 5x cheaper to run than nuclear in another 10 to 20 years.

    Moreover, electricity will be a collection of connected micro-grids in the future, with every household, every neighborhood, every business, being independent of the grid+utility. The biggest purpose of the grid may just be as a vehicle to buy and sell energy. That's basically the only thing I can see keeping an electric grid that connects everything going.

    When EVs have vehicle-to-grid as a default feature, another 10 years down the road, that's when the shit hits the fan with the utility. EV V2G, even cheaper solar panels, and long term storage are going to change the entire energy economy and infrastructure.
    Yeah, not so much.

    https://twitter.com/peterzeihan/status/1444294495722524675

    It appears that China has over counted its population, distorting the data on its birth rate over the last two decades. This leads to one of the very worst case scenarios of a working age population supporting the economy. After that, expect China's population to halve, perhaps as soon as 2050, with China never having "gotten rich before it got old", and never supplanting the U.S. as the World's largest economy. China is likely to be at 750 million while immigration to the U.S. continues to increase our population.

    On top of that, there is a retrenchment in the Global economy, driven as much by reaction to Xi's failing policies as by U.S. increasing isolationism. which is why TSMC has been lured to North America; as insurance against an invasion of Taiwan.

    None of what you predict for the electrical grid is going to happen. If anything, the U.S. is going to "get religion" and buildout a modern grid, that allows power generated in the Southwest, as an example, to be available during twilight hours of the East Coast, reducing the need for stored power, and the reverse of that for the West waking up.

    From the Twitter thread you linked, from Peter Zeihan's tweets themselves: "The newer data suggests China's population will peak somewhere between 2050 and 2070." That means China's population is increasing until 2050 and will perhaps continue to do so out 2070. Be mindful that this is all just estimates on existing birth and death rates, and when Zeihan expects the crossover between birth rate and death rate to occur. 

    That time frame is entirely dependent on what China does. There definitely needs to be a food and water development program to sustain population growth as the extraction of China's natural resources, heck the world's native and wild resources, is nearing its end. There is only so much resources, land and animals to extract. So vertical farming, agrivoltaics, artificial meat, closed-loop water systems, some type of mechanized aquaculture, whatever will increase production will need to be done to sustain.

    Global warming does mean people will be migrating towards the poles. For China, Mongolia's and Siberia's low population density is surely looking tempting right now. You have to question how all this is going to work when there are billions wanting to move there, and Mongolia and Russia are sovereign nations. China can probably maintain in 4° to 6° F world though. It's not going to be pretty though.

    For electrical grid, I think the trends are not good for the existing electricity economic structure. Independence from the electrical grid is in sight, and it will be cheaper than the cost of using the grid. It's just solar and storage. PV will get cheaper. EVs will get cheaper. People will be able to make their own gas from solar power for long term storage or use some other method. When this crossover happens, the shit is going to hit the fan. I'm not sure how the grid can be funded, other than as a tax on commerce with energy units across microgrids and generators.

    Eventually, even water may be independent from the utility. That will probably be the last thing, but closed loop water recycling with the occasional replenishment will be coming. Not close, maybe 50 to 100 years.
    I'll post an earlier link that provides more details, but I don't think that he meant to post that China's population would peak in the 2050 to 2060 timeframe;

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Me2G6FJZMI

    He explicitly states that China's population probably peaked a decade ago.
  • Reply 17 of 26
    thttht Posts: 4,725member
    tmay said:
    tht said:
    tmay said:
    tht said:
    chadbag said:
    lkrupp said:
    chadbag said:
    lkrupp said:
    WilliamM said:
    Will these chips be made in Arizona, shipped to China or India or Vietnam, put into iPhones or iPads or Macs and those products then shipped to the purchaser?

    Not a very environment friendly solution.
    When it comes to the supply chain nobody gives a rat’s ass about the environment, least of all Tim Cook. The public has been clamoring to bring the supply chain back, hopefully with jobs. It’s coming back. What’s your problem? I’m being sarcastic about this because it’s a no win, damned if you do, damned if you don’t proposition. As far as the environment goes China is bringing more coal fired power plants online to supply electricity to the factories that make the devices we in the West crave and can’t live without.
    Short term.  China is also more foresighted than most of the West.  They’re investing heavily in nuclear. Both new tech as well as like a billion new power plants.  Takes time for them to come online but the coal power plants will be gone at some point in the future.  
    Oh wow, another CCP propagandist shows their face. Give us a freakin’ break.
    Lol.  I’m very anti CCP and anti China (under CCP — nothing against the people).  Bringing up unfortunate facts that shows how short sighted the west is does not make one a CCP propagandist.   I am very critical of
    countries outsourcing to China, bowing to China, etc. 

    But they’re not stupid and we need to recognize that.  They (China) are going full steam ahead on nuclear energy and will win the economic race while we are messing around with “renewables” which will never be more than a distraction. 
    China's advantage is their 1.4b people. That's a lot of labor that could be called upon with the right set of programs and incentives. It's also their biggest liability. That's a lot of people to keep happy, a lot of people to feed. Can you imagine 5x more people in the USA? Or 5x more people in Europe? There's going to be consequences. There's going to be a huge technology program just to manage the food, water, and environment to address that. 

    The type of energy technology is basically irrelevant. If anything, they started their nuclear power program about 10 years too late. There's going to be a good chance that those nuclear plants are going to be stranded assets because they will be too expensive to run. Renewables+storage will be 5x cheaper to run than nuclear in another 10 to 20 years.

    Moreover, electricity will be a collection of connected micro-grids in the future, with every household, every neighborhood, every business, being independent of the grid+utility. The biggest purpose of the grid may just be as a vehicle to buy and sell energy. That's basically the only thing I can see keeping an electric grid that connects everything going.

    When EVs have vehicle-to-grid as a default feature, another 10 years down the road, that's when the shit hits the fan with the utility. EV V2G, even cheaper solar panels, and long term storage are going to change the entire energy economy and infrastructure.
    Yeah, not so much.

    https://twitter.com/peterzeihan/status/1444294495722524675

    It appears that China has over counted its population, distorting the data on its birth rate over the last two decades. This leads to one of the very worst case scenarios of a working age population supporting the economy. After that, expect China's population to halve, perhaps as soon as 2050, with China never having "gotten rich before it got old", and never supplanting the U.S. as the World's largest economy. China is likely to be at 750 million while immigration to the U.S. continues to increase our population.

    On top of that, there is a retrenchment in the Global economy, driven as much by reaction to Xi's failing policies as by U.S. increasing isolationism. which is why TSMC has been lured to North America; as insurance against an invasion of Taiwan.

    None of what you predict for the electrical grid is going to happen. If anything, the U.S. is going to "get religion" and buildout a modern grid, that allows power generated in the Southwest, as an example, to be available during twilight hours of the East Coast, reducing the need for stored power, and the reverse of that for the West waking up.

    From the Twitter thread you linked, from Peter Zeihan's tweets themselves: "The newer data suggests China's population will peak somewhere between 2050 and 2070." That means China's population is increasing until 2050 and will perhaps continue to do so out 2070. Be mindful that this is all just estimates on existing birth and death rates, and when Zeihan expects the crossover between birth rate and death rate to occur. 

    That time frame is entirely dependent on what China does. There definitely needs to be a food and water development program to sustain population growth as the extraction of China's natural resources, heck the world's native and wild resources, is nearing its end. There is only so much resources, land and animals to extract. So vertical farming, agrivoltaics, artificial meat, closed-loop water systems, some type of mechanized aquaculture, whatever will increase production will need to be done to sustain.

    Global warming does mean people will be migrating towards the poles. For China, Mongolia's and Siberia's low population density is surely looking tempting right now. You have to question how all this is going to work when there are billions wanting to move there, and Mongolia and Russia are sovereign nations. China can probably maintain in 4° to 6° F world though. It's not going to be pretty though.

    For electrical grid, I think the trends are not good for the existing electricity economic structure. Independence from the electrical grid is in sight, and it will be cheaper than the cost of using the grid. It's just solar and storage. PV will get cheaper. EVs will get cheaper. People will be able to make their own gas from solar power for long term storage or use some other method. When this crossover happens, the shit is going to hit the fan. I'm not sure how the grid can be funded, other than as a tax on commerce with energy units across microgrids and generators.

    Eventually, even water may be independent from the utility. That will probably be the last thing, but closed loop water recycling with the occasional replenishment will be coming. Not close, maybe 50 to 100 years.
    I'll post an earlier link that provides more details, but I don't think that he meant to post that China's population would peak in the 2050 to 2060 timeframe;

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Me2G6FJZMI

    He explicitly states that China's population probably peaked a decade ago.
    I would like to see his assumptions then. If you assume their current population demographics will hold for the next 30 years or so, it looks like their population would decrease to something like 800m by 2100 per Worldbank or UN. For them to decrease in population by 650m by 2050, that represents a net decrease of 22m per year. That sounds a bit crazy. They are currently at a net +3m people per year to 0m people per depending on who's population counts you believe. That net has to go to -22m right now and stay there for the next 30 years. I would like to hear what he thinks will cause that.

    After seeing China's population demographics, I'm convinced that their 1.4b population is basically the peak, give or take the counting uncertainties. At least for the next 30 years. The only discussion is how long the decline will be, ie, what happens to birthrates over the next 30 years. This is where what we assume to happen plays an important factor in declaring this or that. They could maintain, have a slow decline or a fast decline if old age health care goes bad combined with birth rates continuing to decline. It all depends on what they do.

    Overall, I'm actually happy to see that a decline is likely because that is a good outcome for everyone including China. Their economic power by shear force of labor power remains great even with a decline. I would hope there would be a decline in India as well.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 18 of 26
    tht said:
    tmay said:
    tht said:
    tmay said:
    tht said:
    chadbag said:
    lkrupp said:
    chadbag said:
    lkrupp said:
    WilliamM said:
    Will these chips be made in Arizona, shipped to China or India or Vietnam, put into iPhones or iPads or Macs and those products then shipped to the purchaser?

    Not a very environment friendly solution.
    When it comes to the supply chain nobody gives a rat’s ass about the environment, least of all Tim Cook. The public has been clamoring to bring the supply chain back, hopefully with jobs. It’s coming back. What’s your problem? I’m being sarcastic about this because it’s a no win, damned if you do, damned if you don’t proposition. As far as the environment goes China is bringing more coal fired power plants online to supply electricity to the factories that make the devices we in the West crave and can’t live without.
    Short term.  China is also more foresighted than most of the West.  They’re investing heavily in nuclear. Both new tech as well as like a billion new power plants.  Takes time for them to come online but the coal power plants will be gone at some point in the future.  
    Oh wow, another CCP propagandist shows their face. Give us a freakin’ break.
    Lol.  I’m very anti CCP and anti China (under CCP — nothing against the people).  Bringing up unfortunate facts that shows how short sighted the west is does not make one a CCP propagandist.   I am very critical of
    countries outsourcing to China, bowing to China, etc. 

    But they’re not stupid and we need to recognize that.  They (China) are going full steam ahead on nuclear energy and will win the economic race while we are messing around with “renewables” which will never be more than a distraction. 
    China's advantage is their 1.4b people. That's a lot of labor that could be called upon with the right set of programs and incentives. It's also their biggest liability. That's a lot of people to keep happy, a lot of people to feed. Can you imagine 5x more people in the USA? Or 5x more people in Europe? There's going to be consequences. There's going to be a huge technology program just to manage the food, water, and environment to address that. 

    The type of energy technology is basically irrelevant. If anything, they started their nuclear power program about 10 years too late. There's going to be a good chance that those nuclear plants are going to be stranded assets because they will be too expensive to run. Renewables+storage will be 5x cheaper to run than nuclear in another 10 to 20 years.

    Moreover, electricity will be a collection of connected micro-grids in the future, with every household, every neighborhood, every business, being independent of the grid+utility. The biggest purpose of the grid may just be as a vehicle to buy and sell energy. That's basically the only thing I can see keeping an electric grid that connects everything going.

    When EVs have vehicle-to-grid as a default feature, another 10 years down the road, that's when the shit hits the fan with the utility. EV V2G, even cheaper solar panels, and long term storage are going to change the entire energy economy and infrastructure.
    Yeah, not so much.

    https://twitter.com/peterzeihan/status/1444294495722524675

    It appears that China has over counted its population, distorting the data on its birth rate over the last two decades. This leads to one of the very worst case scenarios of a working age population supporting the economy. After that, expect China's population to halve, perhaps as soon as 2050, with China never having "gotten rich before it got old", and never supplanting the U.S. as the World's largest economy. China is likely to be at 750 million while immigration to the U.S. continues to increase our population.

    On top of that, there is a retrenchment in the Global economy, driven as much by reaction to Xi's failing policies as by U.S. increasing isolationism. which is why TSMC has been lured to North America; as insurance against an invasion of Taiwan.

    None of what you predict for the electrical grid is going to happen. If anything, the U.S. is going to "get religion" and buildout a modern grid, that allows power generated in the Southwest, as an example, to be available during twilight hours of the East Coast, reducing the need for stored power, and the reverse of that for the West waking up.

    From the Twitter thread you linked, from Peter Zeihan's tweets themselves: "The newer data suggests China's population will peak somewhere between 2050 and 2070." That means China's population is increasing until 2050 and will perhaps continue to do so out 2070. Be mindful that this is all just estimates on existing birth and death rates, and when Zeihan expects the crossover between birth rate and death rate to occur. 

    That time frame is entirely dependent on what China does. There definitely needs to be a food and water development program to sustain population growth as the extraction of China's natural resources, heck the world's native and wild resources, is nearing its end. There is only so much resources, land and animals to extract. So vertical farming, agrivoltaics, artificial meat, closed-loop water systems, some type of mechanized aquaculture, whatever will increase production will need to be done to sustain.

    Global warming does mean people will be migrating towards the poles. For China, Mongolia's and Siberia's low population density is surely looking tempting right now. You have to question how all this is going to work when there are billions wanting to move there, and Mongolia and Russia are sovereign nations. China can probably maintain in 4° to 6° F world though. It's not going to be pretty though.

    For electrical grid, I think the trends are not good for the existing electricity economic structure. Independence from the electrical grid is in sight, and it will be cheaper than the cost of using the grid. It's just solar and storage. PV will get cheaper. EVs will get cheaper. People will be able to make their own gas from solar power for long term storage or use some other method. When this crossover happens, the shit is going to hit the fan. I'm not sure how the grid can be funded, other than as a tax on commerce with energy units across microgrids and generators.

    Eventually, even water may be independent from the utility. That will probably be the last thing, but closed loop water recycling with the occasional replenishment will be coming. Not close, maybe 50 to 100 years.
    I'll post an earlier link that provides more details, but I don't think that he meant to post that China's population would peak in the 2050 to 2060 timeframe;

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Me2G6FJZMI

    He explicitly states that China's population probably peaked a decade ago.
    I would like to see his assumptions then. If you assume their current population demographics will hold for the next 30 years or so, it looks like their population would decrease to something like 800m by 2100 per Worldbank or UN. For them to decrease in population by 650m by 2050, that represents a net decrease of 22m per year. That sounds a bit crazy. They are currently at a net +3m people per year to 0m people per depending on who's population counts you believe. That net has to go to -22m right now and stay there for the next 30 years. I would like to hear what he thinks will cause that.

    After seeing China's population demographics, I'm convinced that their 1.4b population is basically the peak, give or take the counting uncertainties. At least for the next 30 years. The only discussion is how long the decline will be, ie, what happens to birthrates over the next 30 years. This is where what we assume to happen plays an important factor in declaring this or that. They could maintain, have a slow decline or a fast decline if old age health care goes bad combined with birth rates continuing to decline. It all depends on what they do.

    Overall, I'm actually happy to see that a decline is likely because that is a good outcome for everyone including China. Their economic power by shear force of labor power remains great even with a decline. I would hope there would be a decline in India as well.
    I think you are absolutely spot on with your observations in this post. I have read @tmay's earlier posts on chinese population declining to 650m by 2050 and it never made any sense to me. May be, @tmay is reading too much of propaganda against China and does not spend enough time thinking through them on what makes sense and what does not. India's population would grow for another 2-3 decades at least before reaching peak and then start going down slowly in the 2nd half of this century.
    edited December 2022 waveparticle
  • Reply 19 of 26
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,825member
    tht said:
    tmay said:
    tht said:
    tmay said:
    tht said:
    chadbag said:
    lkrupp said:
    chadbag said:
    lkrupp said:
    WilliamM said:
    Will these chips be made in Arizona, shipped to China or India or Vietnam, put into iPhones or iPads or Macs and those products then shipped to the purchaser?

    Not a very environment friendly solution.
    When it comes to the supply chain nobody gives a rat’s ass about the environment, least of all Tim Cook. The public has been clamoring to bring the supply chain back, hopefully with jobs. It’s coming back. What’s your problem? I’m being sarcastic about this because it’s a no win, damned if you do, damned if you don’t proposition. As far as the environment goes China is bringing more coal fired power plants online to supply electricity to the factories that make the devices we in the West crave and can’t live without.
    Short term.  China is also more foresighted than most of the West.  They’re investing heavily in nuclear. Both new tech as well as like a billion new power plants.  Takes time for them to come online but the coal power plants will be gone at some point in the future.  
    Oh wow, another CCP propagandist shows their face. Give us a freakin’ break.
    Lol.  I’m very anti CCP and anti China (under CCP — nothing against the people).  Bringing up unfortunate facts that shows how short sighted the west is does not make one a CCP propagandist.   I am very critical of
    countries outsourcing to China, bowing to China, etc. 

    But they’re not stupid and we need to recognize that.  They (China) are going full steam ahead on nuclear energy and will win the economic race while we are messing around with “renewables” which will never be more than a distraction. 
    China's advantage is their 1.4b people. That's a lot of labor that could be called upon with the right set of programs and incentives. It's also their biggest liability. That's a lot of people to keep happy, a lot of people to feed. Can you imagine 5x more people in the USA? Or 5x more people in Europe? There's going to be consequences. There's going to be a huge technology program just to manage the food, water, and environment to address that. 

    The type of energy technology is basically irrelevant. If anything, they started their nuclear power program about 10 years too late. There's going to be a good chance that those nuclear plants are going to be stranded assets because they will be too expensive to run. Renewables+storage will be 5x cheaper to run than nuclear in another 10 to 20 years.

    Moreover, electricity will be a collection of connected micro-grids in the future, with every household, every neighborhood, every business, being independent of the grid+utility. The biggest purpose of the grid may just be as a vehicle to buy and sell energy. That's basically the only thing I can see keeping an electric grid that connects everything going.

    When EVs have vehicle-to-grid as a default feature, another 10 years down the road, that's when the shit hits the fan with the utility. EV V2G, even cheaper solar panels, and long term storage are going to change the entire energy economy and infrastructure.
    Yeah, not so much.

    https://twitter.com/peterzeihan/status/1444294495722524675

    It appears that China has over counted its population, distorting the data on its birth rate over the last two decades. This leads to one of the very worst case scenarios of a working age population supporting the economy. After that, expect China's population to halve, perhaps as soon as 2050, with China never having "gotten rich before it got old", and never supplanting the U.S. as the World's largest economy. China is likely to be at 750 million while immigration to the U.S. continues to increase our population.

    On top of that, there is a retrenchment in the Global economy, driven as much by reaction to Xi's failing policies as by U.S. increasing isolationism. which is why TSMC has been lured to North America; as insurance against an invasion of Taiwan.

    None of what you predict for the electrical grid is going to happen. If anything, the U.S. is going to "get religion" and buildout a modern grid, that allows power generated in the Southwest, as an example, to be available during twilight hours of the East Coast, reducing the need for stored power, and the reverse of that for the West waking up.

    From the Twitter thread you linked, from Peter Zeihan's tweets themselves: "The newer data suggests China's population will peak somewhere between 2050 and 2070." That means China's population is increasing until 2050 and will perhaps continue to do so out 2070. Be mindful that this is all just estimates on existing birth and death rates, and when Zeihan expects the crossover between birth rate and death rate to occur. 

    That time frame is entirely dependent on what China does. There definitely needs to be a food and water development program to sustain population growth as the extraction of China's natural resources, heck the world's native and wild resources, is nearing its end. There is only so much resources, land and animals to extract. So vertical farming, agrivoltaics, artificial meat, closed-loop water systems, some type of mechanized aquaculture, whatever will increase production will need to be done to sustain.

    Global warming does mean people will be migrating towards the poles. For China, Mongolia's and Siberia's low population density is surely looking tempting right now. You have to question how all this is going to work when there are billions wanting to move there, and Mongolia and Russia are sovereign nations. China can probably maintain in 4° to 6° F world though. It's not going to be pretty though.

    For electrical grid, I think the trends are not good for the existing electricity economic structure. Independence from the electrical grid is in sight, and it will be cheaper than the cost of using the grid. It's just solar and storage. PV will get cheaper. EVs will get cheaper. People will be able to make their own gas from solar power for long term storage or use some other method. When this crossover happens, the shit is going to hit the fan. I'm not sure how the grid can be funded, other than as a tax on commerce with energy units across microgrids and generators.

    Eventually, even water may be independent from the utility. That will probably be the last thing, but closed loop water recycling with the occasional replenishment will be coming. Not close, maybe 50 to 100 years.
    I'll post an earlier link that provides more details, but I don't think that he meant to post that China's population would peak in the 2050 to 2060 timeframe;

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Me2G6FJZMI

    He explicitly states that China's population probably peaked a decade ago.
    I would like to see his assumptions then. If you assume their current population demographics will hold for the next 30 years or so, it looks like their population would decrease to something like 800m by 2100 per Worldbank or UN. For them to decrease in population by 650m by 2050, that represents a net decrease of 22m per year. That sounds a bit crazy. They are currently at a net +3m people per year to 0m people per depending on who's population counts you believe. That net has to go to -22m right now and stay there for the next 30 years. I would like to hear what he thinks will cause that.

    After seeing China's population demographics, I'm convinced that their 1.4b population is basically the peak, give or take the counting uncertainties. At least for the next 30 years. The only discussion is how long the decline will be, ie, what happens to birthrates over the next 30 years. This is where what we assume to happen plays an important factor in declaring this or that. They could maintain, have a slow decline or a fast decline if old age health care goes bad combined with birth rates continuing to decline. It all depends on what they do.

    Overall, I'm actually happy to see that a decline is likely because that is a good outcome for everyone including China. Their economic power by shear force of labor power remains great even with a decline. I would hope there would be a decline in India as well.
    I think you are absolutely spot on with your observations in this post. I have read @tmay's earlier posts on chinese population declining to 650m by 2050 and it never made any sense to me. May be, @tmay is reading too much of propaganda against China and does not spend enough time thinking through them on what makes sense and what does not. India's population would grow for another 2-3 decades at least before reaching peak and then start going down slowly in the 2nd half of this century.
    Demographics is not propaganda, and you comparing Indian's growth to China's doesn't make sense as India has never had a One Child policy.

    Now it may be the case that my sources are wrong in their predictions, but there isn't any case to be made that China's population isn't going to rapidly decline. More to the point, China never has had a 1.4 Billon population. It's likely that India has already surpassed China in population.
    edited December 2022
  • Reply 20 of 26
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,825member
    tht said:
    tmay said:
    tht said:
    tmay said:
    tht said:
    chadbag said:
    lkrupp said:
    chadbag said:
    lkrupp said:
    WilliamM said:
    Will these chips be made in Arizona, shipped to China or India or Vietnam, put into iPhones or iPads or Macs and those products then shipped to the purchaser?

    Not a very environment friendly solution.
    When it comes to the supply chain nobody gives a rat’s ass about the environment, least of all Tim Cook. The public has been clamoring to bring the supply chain back, hopefully with jobs. It’s coming back. What’s your problem? I’m being sarcastic about this because it’s a no win, damned if you do, damned if you don’t proposition. As far as the environment goes China is bringing more coal fired power plants online to supply electricity to the factories that make the devices we in the West crave and can’t live without.
    Short term.  China is also more foresighted than most of the West.  They’re investing heavily in nuclear. Both new tech as well as like a billion new power plants.  Takes time for them to come online but the coal power plants will be gone at some point in the future.  
    Oh wow, another CCP propagandist shows their face. Give us a freakin’ break.
    Lol.  I’m very anti CCP and anti China (under CCP — nothing against the people).  Bringing up unfortunate facts that shows how short sighted the west is does not make one a CCP propagandist.   I am very critical of
    countries outsourcing to China, bowing to China, etc. 

    But they’re not stupid and we need to recognize that.  They (China) are going full steam ahead on nuclear energy and will win the economic race while we are messing around with “renewables” which will never be more than a distraction. 
    China's advantage is their 1.4b people. That's a lot of labor that could be called upon with the right set of programs and incentives. It's also their biggest liability. That's a lot of people to keep happy, a lot of people to feed. Can you imagine 5x more people in the USA? Or 5x more people in Europe? There's going to be consequences. There's going to be a huge technology program just to manage the food, water, and environment to address that. 

    The type of energy technology is basically irrelevant. If anything, they started their nuclear power program about 10 years too late. There's going to be a good chance that those nuclear plants are going to be stranded assets because they will be too expensive to run. Renewables+storage will be 5x cheaper to run than nuclear in another 10 to 20 years.

    Moreover, electricity will be a collection of connected micro-grids in the future, with every household, every neighborhood, every business, being independent of the grid+utility. The biggest purpose of the grid may just be as a vehicle to buy and sell energy. That's basically the only thing I can see keeping an electric grid that connects everything going.

    When EVs have vehicle-to-grid as a default feature, another 10 years down the road, that's when the shit hits the fan with the utility. EV V2G, even cheaper solar panels, and long term storage are going to change the entire energy economy and infrastructure.
    Yeah, not so much.

    https://twitter.com/peterzeihan/status/1444294495722524675

    It appears that China has over counted its population, distorting the data on its birth rate over the last two decades. This leads to one of the very worst case scenarios of a working age population supporting the economy. After that, expect China's population to halve, perhaps as soon as 2050, with China never having "gotten rich before it got old", and never supplanting the U.S. as the World's largest economy. China is likely to be at 750 million while immigration to the U.S. continues to increase our population.

    On top of that, there is a retrenchment in the Global economy, driven as much by reaction to Xi's failing policies as by U.S. increasing isolationism. which is why TSMC has been lured to North America; as insurance against an invasion of Taiwan.

    None of what you predict for the electrical grid is going to happen. If anything, the U.S. is going to "get religion" and buildout a modern grid, that allows power generated in the Southwest, as an example, to be available during twilight hours of the East Coast, reducing the need for stored power, and the reverse of that for the West waking up.

    From the Twitter thread you linked, from Peter Zeihan's tweets themselves: "The newer data suggests China's population will peak somewhere between 2050 and 2070." That means China's population is increasing until 2050 and will perhaps continue to do so out 2070. Be mindful that this is all just estimates on existing birth and death rates, and when Zeihan expects the crossover between birth rate and death rate to occur. 

    That time frame is entirely dependent on what China does. There definitely needs to be a food and water development program to sustain population growth as the extraction of China's natural resources, heck the world's native and wild resources, is nearing its end. There is only so much resources, land and animals to extract. So vertical farming, agrivoltaics, artificial meat, closed-loop water systems, some type of mechanized aquaculture, whatever will increase production will need to be done to sustain.

    Global warming does mean people will be migrating towards the poles. For China, Mongolia's and Siberia's low population density is surely looking tempting right now. You have to question how all this is going to work when there are billions wanting to move there, and Mongolia and Russia are sovereign nations. China can probably maintain in 4° to 6° F world though. It's not going to be pretty though.

    For electrical grid, I think the trends are not good for the existing electricity economic structure. Independence from the electrical grid is in sight, and it will be cheaper than the cost of using the grid. It's just solar and storage. PV will get cheaper. EVs will get cheaper. People will be able to make their own gas from solar power for long term storage or use some other method. When this crossover happens, the shit is going to hit the fan. I'm not sure how the grid can be funded, other than as a tax on commerce with energy units across microgrids and generators.

    Eventually, even water may be independent from the utility. That will probably be the last thing, but closed loop water recycling with the occasional replenishment will be coming. Not close, maybe 50 to 100 years.
    I'll post an earlier link that provides more details, but I don't think that he meant to post that China's population would peak in the 2050 to 2060 timeframe;

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Me2G6FJZMI

    He explicitly states that China's population probably peaked a decade ago.
    I would like to see his assumptions then. If you assume their current population demographics will hold for the next 30 years or so, it looks like their population would decrease to something like 800m by 2100 per Worldbank or UN. For them to decrease in population by 650m by 2050, that represents a net decrease of 22m per year. That sounds a bit crazy. They are currently at a net +3m people per year to 0m people per depending on who's population counts you believe. That net has to go to -22m right now and stay there for the next 30 years. I would like to hear what he thinks will cause that.

    After seeing China's population demographics, I'm convinced that their 1.4b population is basically the peak, give or take the counting uncertainties. At least for the next 30 years. The only discussion is how long the decline will be, ie, what happens to birthrates over the next 30 years. This is where what we assume to happen plays an important factor in declaring this or that. They could maintain, have a slow decline or a fast decline if old age health care goes bad combined with birth rates continuing to decline. It all depends on what they do.

    Overall, I'm actually happy to see that a decline is likely because that is a good outcome for everyone including China. Their economic power by shear force of labor power remains great even with a decline. I would hope there would be a decline in India as well.
    The sources that I quote are using birthrates that are lower than some other sources, true, but there is nothing to indicate today that Chinese women are going to increase their birthrate, over improving their standard of living. This mirrors almost every other developed country in the world.
Sign In or Register to comment.