Halvor Dalaker

Materials scientist. Likes it when people are kind. Likes nature. Nerd. Circular economy and energy transition. He/him. Researching the good life.

[Halvor Dalaker @Dr_Bab]

@sindrus rutluk-uken

[AukeHoekstra @AukeHoekstra]

A few years back, @sapinker and @BjornLomborg where contrarian heroes of mine.

Steven Pinker proved that despite all the doom and gloom in the media (where the adagio is "if it bleeds, it leads" and apocalypse sells) many if not most objective measures of well-being are still improving. And that is still the case as far as I can tell.

From Bjorn Lomborg I *loved* the Sceptical Environmentalist and the first Copenhagen Consensus! He e.g. was simply right that you save more lives by giving money to malaria nets than by giving money to renewable subsidies. He already fabricated and cherry picked some numbers during this time, but I think his main conclusions from that period still stand.

Were things went wrong is when stimulating renewable energy became cost effective because it lowers the price of the technology. E.g. solar panels and batteries have become over 100x cheaper per kWh over the last decades and there is no end in sight.

Not only through research (which we agree often has the largest multiplication factor) but also through deployment. The effect can be predicted using learning curves and learning curves are something Lomborg can't or won't grasp. But for many technologies, learning curves are statistically rock solid developments for decades now. They show every doubling of production reduces prices by X percent. E.g. solar panel prices by ~21% and battery prices by ~28%. Combined with fossil subsidies and CO2 costs and using societal discount rates this means that speeding up this transition has become cost negative.
(E.g. https://t.co/0z4Xi6HXg5)
If you also value life everywhere on earth equally (what the Copenhagen Consensus of Lomborg claims to do) by ignorming Negishi wellfare weights, the CO2 price becomes much higher still and speeding things up means saving lives.

Most serious research into EV's agrees that they now have a lower TCO (total cost of ownership) and the sticker price that drives customer behavior is now also lower in China and will soon be lower outside China.
(E.g. https://t.co/Wxahw4GAkh)

Solar panels plus batteries are also increasingly the cheaper options and simply walking down the learning curve a decade more will give them a very large net societal benefit. So we can actually finance malaria nets from transitioning faster. That ditching fossil fuels faster costs money simply isn't true anymore based on new research.

Because Lomborg has chosen the position that renewables are a waste of money, and he won't change this signature stance, he's increasingly cherry picking and straight up lying about electric vehicles and renewable energy systems (my specialties) in a way that's so smart and predictable that I simply can't imagine he's still unaware of being untruthful.

I haven't cancelled him - I agree with Steven Pinker we do that far too easily - and now and then I debunk a piece he has written, but mostly I've given up on correcting objective untruths he proclaims. He seems uninterested in corrections. Not from me and not from others. He just tells the untruths a bit more circumspect next time. It's all very transparent if this is your specialty.

The claim by Pinker that when you dispute Lomborgs logic or conclusions, Lomborg "would be the first to admit ...he... could be wrong" simply doesn't fit with any recent (last 5 year) exchange on the facts I've witnessed between Lomborg and people who point out he's incorrect.

I could imagine Steven Pinker is unaware of this. Pinker probably thinks his earlier (imho unjust) excommunication and the reaction against his more recent writings are one and the same thing.

I also have the impression that Pinker overestimates the extend to which he understands renewable energy systems. I think he doesn't grasp what a combination of solar panels, batteries and other storage looks like in terms of economics, land use, and material use, and how costs are quickly diminishing. He uses the word intermittent a lot for solar and wind, but that's often a tell for not being aware of the recent literature and developments and promoting nuclear without fully understanding why.

I think that's why Pinker is part of a crowd that in my perception claims: "nuclear will miraculously get cheaper now and renewables will miraculously stop getting cheaper now so we need nuclear". If that helps to make nuclear cheap: power to them. But based on developments in the past decades and my understanding of the technologies I'm not holding my breath.

All in all it's always a bitter pill if your heroes get calcified and can't change their stance anymore based on new evidence.

In the case of Steven Pinker I think his focus (that well-being is still improving) is still true as far as I can tell. It's also not my specialty so I don't feel the need or ability to judge there. On energy I consider him simply one of many (usually older) people behind the times.

In the case of Bjorn Lomborg I've tentatively come to the conclusion that he likes attention, money and telling a certain vision more than being truthful. That hurts a bit, but I've moved on.

[Chris Bataille @bataille_chris]

I was just wondering how Elysis was doing with its inert anode aluminum reduction technology (which would save about 2 t CO2 per tonne aluminium made), and low and below, they've just successfully started one up #greenaluminum . https://t.co/20OUIsE7VH

[Halvor Dalaker @Dr_Bab]

The article I wrote on the Mecalo-project is now out in "magazine"-form. Head to p242 to read about how renewable hydrogen and carbon looping can decarbonise the production of critical raw materials like manganese and silicon.

[Innovation News Network @InnoNewsNetwork]

The Innovation Platform Issue 21 is live! 🌍 Insights on climate change, space, antimicrobial resistance & more from experts like OECD, @CERN, @UKRI_News & @esa.

Read here: https://t.co/dPza5Wtjgc

[Halvor Dalaker @Dr_Bab]

I write about Mecalo at @InnoNewsNetwork:

[Innovation News Network @InnoNewsNetwork]

The MECALO Project's carbon looping tech is set to transform metal production, reducing emissions and paving the way for a greener future.

Learn more: https://t.co/41FofeimFc #Sustainability #MetalProduction

[Halvor Dalaker @Dr_Bab]

@gnievchenko Are you telling me that I need to seek out Lebanese gherkins? I’ve always rated the Polish ones as best in world.

[Halvor Dalaker @Dr_Bab]

@MLiebreich (Not so familiar with this part of the value chain, but H2 could also be used for heat in upstream alumina refining in the Bayer process. Again, direct electricity would be better if possible).

[Halvor Dalaker @Dr_Bab]

@MLiebreich Hydrogen could play a role in decarbonising melting of scrap and casting, which is what they will continue to investigate internally. If plasma heating can be made to work, that would obv. have an efficiency advantage over H2 combustion.

[Halvor Dalaker @Dr_Bab]

@gnievchenko Tried to PM you.

[Halvor Dalaker @Dr_Bab]

@gnievchenko Green14 are aiming for hydrogen plasma. Pretty exotic.

[Horizon 2020 project HARARE @H2020_Harare]

Dont miss out! It is still time to register for the online event!

International seminar
Hydrogen use in Process Metallurgy
Date: 15-16 May 2024, Trondheim, Norway (Hybrid)

https://t.co/BGdvuaixVW

@Dr_Bab @halman_project @SINTEF @NTNU

[Halvor Dalaker @Dr_Bab]

@bracecricket Thanks! BBC app or website does not work, was not aware of youtube option, which does work. Thanks for the help and thanks again for the commentary.

[Halvor Dalaker @Dr_Bab]

@bracecricket Today the ECB website also does not work. It says «no matches available».

[Halvor Dalaker @Dr_Bab]

@bracecricket Update: The livestream works, so I can listen in there. But no luck on BBC app or BBC website.

[Halvor Dalaker @Dr_Bab]

@Andercot @UlfricU That’s an interesting thought.

[Halvor Dalaker @Dr_Bab]

@UlfricU @Andercot Probably at least partly due to cost of education.

[Halvor Dalaker @Dr_Bab]

@UlfricU @Andercot This is false,
social mobility is lower in the US. Latest social mobilty ranking had US at number 27 globally, behind 20 European nations. All of top 13 nations are in Europe, first non-european nation is Canada at #14.

https://t.co/XEqFJg23mf