black swan cave

Financial markets. Scientist. This time is not different.

[black swan cave @CaveSwan]

@RZitelmann Inflation besteuern - grossartige Idee 😀

[black swan cave @CaveSwan]

Where does the oil through Strait of Hormuz go to? Not to US, very limited shipments to EU. China and India are apparently allowed to pass...so where is the bottleneck?

[Der Physiker 🇮🇱 @DerPhysiker21]

Als Physiker und Ökonometriker schäme ich mich für die ideologiegetriebene wissenschaftlich und ökonomisch fehlerhafte vielzitierte Frauenhofer-Studie zur Kernkraft. Die drei Kardinalfehler:

1. Angenommene Baukosten 9000 €/kWh, während selbst der finnische Prototypreaktor nur 6000 €/kWh kostet. Mit Skalierung wird das um etwa Faktor 3 billiger (China: 2000-3000 €/kWh, Deutschland 1970er: etwa 2000 €/kWh in gegenwärtiger Kaufkraft).

2. Unrealistischer Zins von 10% bei KKW, realistische 5% bei Wind: Besonders perfide, da das Einnahmeprofil der Kernkraft weit in der Zukunft liegt. Nach 20 Jahren sind bei 10% Zinsen weniger als 14% der Investition übrig. Allein das Zinsdifferential verfälscht die prospektive Kosten-Butzen Relation in 20 Jahren um den Faktor e=2.7 zuungunsten der KKW.

3. Angenommene Auslastung 25-30%, da Fraunhofer natürlich ihre Lieblinge hätschelt. Natürlich läuft Kernkraft in jeder sinnvollen Energiestrategie als Grundlastlaufwerk 90-95% der Zeit. Um die fluktuierende Residuallast können sich dann die fluktuierenden EE, gestützt durch Batterien, balgen. Wie erhalten eine weitere fälschliche Erhöhung der Kosten/Nutzen Relation von KKW zugunsten VRE um mehr als den Faktor 3 zu jeder prospektiven Zeit.

Fazit: Drei elementare Fehler, von denen jeder (!) das Verhältnis der Kosten von KKW in Relation zu VRE um den Faktor 2-3 (!) verfälscht.

Als Ökonometrie- Masterarbeit eingereicht, hätte ich dem Kandidaten dieses Konvolut um die Ohren gehauen.

[black swan cave @CaveSwan]

US10y

[black swan cave @CaveSwan]

EUR vs. US$ - starting to fall or nothing?

[Dr. Matthew M. Wielicki @MatthewWielicki]

This chart demolishes one of the central claims of the climate cult.

It comes from Munich Re, one of the world’s largest reinsurance companies. Their entire business depends on accurately pricing risk.

What does it show?

Weather disaster losses as a percentage of global GDP from 1990–2025.

Not raw dollars.
Not media headlines.
Losses normalized to the size of the global economy.

And the trend?

Flat… if anything slightly declining.

If climate change were causing an explosion in extreme weather damages, losses should be rising faster than global wealth.

They aren’t.

What we see instead are occasional spikes (1993, 2005, 2017) surrounded by long periods of normal variability. Weather fluctuates. The long-term trend does not show escalating catastrophe.

So why does the public constantly hear about “record climate disasters”?

Because the climate industrial complex almost always cites raw dollar losses. As the global economy grows and more infrastructure exists, of course the total cost of disasters rises.

That’s not climate.

That’s propaganda.

Normalize the data properly, and the panic narrative falls apart.

The truth is simple: despite rising CO₂ and endless climate alarmism, weather disasters are not consuming a larger share of global wealth.

The climate cult needs people to believe the world is spiraling into chaos.

The data keep saying otherwise.

[Gert Wöllmann @Gert_Woellmann]

@julius__boehm Es ist noch deutlich schlimmer. Die Gestehungskosten der Kernkraftwerke hat Frauenhofer zielgerichtet – mit einer (geringen) Auslastung – als Backup der EE berechnet. 🤡

[Oliver Groß @minenergybiz]

Unreal numbers 👀⚡️
"JPMorgan estimates that, had Germany not phased out nuclear power, the country would have generated 50% less electricity from fossil fuels and 84% less electricity from natural gas in 2024. Electricity prices in Germany would have been around 25% lower, and the country would have imported half as much electricity.."

[James Melville 🚜 @JamesMelville]

“Cows have a digestion system that emits methane. We need to change cows and work towards artificial meat.”
~ Bill Gates

He fails to mention that methane from cows breaks down into CO2 & water after 10 years. Grass absorbs the CO2 by photosynthesis & the cycle repeats itself.

[black swan cave @CaveSwan]

On EE in Germany 2022 - 2025 - 3

[black swan cave @CaveSwan]

On EE in Germany 2022 - 2025 - 2

[black swan cave @CaveSwan]

On EE in Germany 2022-2025 - 1:

[black swan cave @CaveSwan]

@MichaelAArouet I wonder why the French are in favour of Eurobonds...

[Sabine Bär @SabineBr3]

Politische Bilder

[MAZE @mazemoore]

Six years ago Bernie Sanders claimed that humanity only had about six years left to stop the existential threat of climate change.

Bernie said the way to stop it was by passing the Green New Deal. The GND was projected to cost between $10 and $90 trillion.

Bernie doesn't talk as much about climate change as he used to. Now he fundraises off of "Fight the Oligarchy."

[The Rabbit Hole @TheRabbitHole]

Myth: The rich don’t pay their fair share

Reality: They pay more