11 Comments
Apr 13, 2022·edited Apr 13, 2022Liked by Liberty

I have seen communities built in Slack in the past (lucky they migrated away from it) and Discord. Slack has a 10k message limit on free communities, and messages are invisible (do not appear in search or you cannot navigate through them) after. It seems 10k limit is a lot, but in fact it is not. This is quite a huge technical limitation which makes Slack objectively worse IMHO.

Expand full comment
author

That's good to know. Thanks Mikel! 💚 🥃

Expand full comment

This prediction chart really made me think; why do we even bother to do long term projections? It’s just fake comfort of knowing and thinking about where things are headed. Plus, I imagine an employee just amending his excel sheet a bit. ;)

Expand full comment
author

It's worse than that: Decisions are made based on these predictions, so there may be more or less capital going into various types of energy production/capex/development based on these types of predictions...

Expand full comment
Apr 14, 2022Liked by Liberty

I recommend this 4Q letter

https://f.hubspotusercontent40.net/hubfs/4043042/Content%20Offers/2021.Q4%20Commentary/2021.Q4%20GR%20Market%20Commentary.pdf

Pretty interesting counterpoint to these projections for lower renewable energy costs into the future. At the very least, I hadn't heard the argument before.

This paragraph from the letter is a good summary of this particular argument.

"It is no coincidence that the proliferation of renewable energy occurred during a decade of abundant cheap energy and abundant cheap capital. As both resources become scarcer and more expensive, the inherent limitation of renewable energy (i.e., its significantly worse EROEI) will come to the fore. Our view is extremely out-of-consensus. In fact, most investors believe low energy prices have severely discouraged the adoption of renewable energy. When we ask what impact rising energy prices will have on renewables, the vast majority argue that higher energy prices will help renewables by making them more cost competitive. Most investors are under the impression that much higher energy prices will push renewables “into the money”--- that is renewables will become competitive for the first time versus higher priced hydrocarbons. This completely ignores the fact that energy itself makes up the single largest cost component for both wind and solar. Instead of making renewable energy more cost competitive, higher energy prices will simply drive up the costs. Renewables today remain “out of the money” and higher energy prices will never be able to push renewables “into the money."

Expand full comment
author

Thanks. I've seen variations of this argument over the years. I tend to think that there will be bumps in the road, but that the 4-5 decade trends are clear, and that the destination is clear.

Any negative from higher production costs from higher energy costs won't offset completely the differential in operational "fuel" costs, it seems to me. And not only that, but as you reach certain ratios of non-fossil energy use (I include hydro, nuclear in this), you can more easily run the factories and mines on this energy, decoupling it from fossil fuel prices.

But it's a very complex and messy system, and there's going to be lots of local variations and such, so who knows what will happen ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I just remember people saying 10-15 years ago that solar and wind costs had fallen as much as they were going to and were about to flatline. Reminds me of the repeated calls that we had reached the end of CPU improvements... Seems like innovation tends to win

Expand full comment
Apr 14, 2022Liked by Liberty

I think that's a really good point about the ratio of non-fossil energy usage. I completely agree with you. Cheers

Expand full comment

Organically produced content and discussions will be crucial for the success of the discord community. Considering how subject driven the discord platform is (i.e there can be several themed chats in a channel) - I think you are right to say that defining its purpose will be instrumental. I assume you already have a decent (or better) understanding of what drives us, your readers, here - so I trust you will identify the right themes that will spark discussion and curiosity.

Expand full comment
author

That's the other thing I'm thinking about, what kind of structure it would have on the inside.

I generally think it should be really simple. I've seen too many forums and communities where there's 17 sub-sections/categories, and it really dilutes things -- wherever you go is never all that active.

So I'd probably try to have only 2-3 rooms.

Maybe 1 where people can share interesting stuff they've read/seen lately, as a kind of "other people's highlights" room, where I'm sure I'd also find ideas of things to write about that I wouldn't see otherwise (with credit going to sources, of course!).

Maybe 1 room for general discussion and 1 for feedback on the current editions of the newsletter, but maybe that can all be just 1 room 🤔

And if it ever grows too big and busy, maybe some things can be split off into their own sub-channels... I don't know. I'm open to suggestions ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Expand full comment

I definitely agree with all three. One more I would consider is a more investment focused sub-channel (maybe investing philosophy/ideas). I came here with the intention to read interesting business/investing news but I found myself enjoying the rest equally as much.

Expand full comment
author

That's not a bad idea, though maybe at first it could all go in the general channel, but if it ever becomes too busy there, it could be split into general non-investing stuff and investing 🤔

Glad you like the variety! That's kind of an unspoken goal, to try to get people to explore a bit outside of their usual areas of specialization/interest 👍

Expand full comment