A Short Preview (Login to Access the Full Interview):

Farrell: “They seem to come out with these hot fusion announcements every time the market is in trouble.”
Fitts: “Right. Every time the dollar is falling, they need to prove that they can increase productivity, and it’s going to come through breakthrough energy.”
~ Dr. Joseph P. Farrell and Catherine Austin Fitts, 2nd Quarter 2023 Wrap Up, News Trends & Stories, Part I

By Catherine Austin Fitts

With the help of allies like Patrick Wood, the Solari Report has sounded the alarm about technocracy for many years, explaining that one of technocracy’s core features is central management of all resources, including energy. As the centralization push accelerates, the importance of understanding energy reality (as opposed to “official reality”) has become increasingly evident.

For that reason, I invited independent energy consultant and systems engineer Charlie Stephens to give Solari subscribers an overview of energy in the 21st century. In Part I, we consider various energy sources and the important concept of “energy return on investment” as well as unanswered questions about breakthrough energy.

In Part II, we dive further into the weaponization of environmental and climate concerns—and the monetary and fiscal policies that make that weaponization go. We also talk about the enormous energy costs of the control grid. Finally, we emphasize that our ability to shift from unproductive and destructive energy policies to something more positive and intelligent depends on a shift to lawful and transparent governance and regenerative agriculture.

Energy is a critical variable that shapes our day-to-day experience in a myriad of ways. Listening to these two interviews will help you navigate the flood of confusing debate and propaganda on this topic.

Money & Markets:

This is the last week of the month, so there is no Money & Markets. The next Money & Markets will publish on September 7. Post questions at the Money & Markets commentary here.


88 Comments

  1. I was (once again) reflecting on Hope today. Hopelessness is indeed a great way for the rackets to neutralize resistance. But so is False Hope. Too many people in my opinion state lightly that this will e over in a few years. And that knowledge keeps them going. The problem is: What if it takes longer? Where will you be in that case?
    I believe (although not every day with the same strength) that we will eventually create that Simple, Harmonious, Productive Life here on Earth, but it might not happen in our lifetime. So in my opinion we need to lead a purposeful life in the spirit of Victor Frankl: Develop our talents and use them for the right things, Be kind to the people, animals and nature around us and, finally, carry our lives in good and bad times with dignity. Then, no matter what happens, we will have done the right thing.
    (source: Victor Frankl, Man’s search for meaning)

    1. Could not agree more. Very well said, Gerdt. Changing a 500 year old model can take more than a century, not to mention what happens if it goes upside down. That was the mystery of the cathedrals. The initial designers and builders would never live to see their work finished. Will be the same for me and Solari. Or what flows from your students and their families and students. Same for you. “What we do echos in eternity” That is what makes for a good life.

    2. I very much agree with you, Gerdt. False hope isn’t helpful, but real hope might be not much more than believing that each of us has agency – that how we conduct ourselves can change how things happen in the world. Imagine what might happen if the primary goal of society was the thriving of all life. I suspect many people would sign up for that, but they aren’t the people who have been determining the outcomes of our societal systems. We’ve allowed the worst of humanity to run things. I do have some hope that we can change that situation. And like you, I suspect it will take a while to get it done. The biggest challenge is in getting started. Charlie

      1. YUP. Good time for everyone to GET UP OFF THE COUCH! If we all do what we can and have the heart to do, remarkable what can happen.

    3. Gerdt:
      Can I quote you? Let me know if yes, if I should attribute to you or to a Solari Report subscriber

  2. Hi, some more thoughts on the 21st Century Energy. ….
    Before I get into the detail, I need some definitions :
    Anthropogenic Global Warming : Caused by humans, temperature changes.
    Climate change : AGW plus changes caused by Nations, including weather wars.
    Complexity : Systemic change from one stable state to another stable state.
    Complication : Systemic change at or beyond the limits of human comprehension

    I’m not convinced by Charlie Stephens argument extending by implication recent temperature and/or weather changes to cover the last 800,000 years. Maybe I missed something. I’d prefer written evidence, but I suggest the following two videos explain things a little better (apologies for linking to theirtube) :

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmmmgiPha_Y

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0Cp7DrvNLQ

    There is other stuff, more complicated, and there’s still no certainty as to causes. It’s complicated.

      1. I live in the Pacific Northwest, and when we’re not engulfed in smoke or on fire, it’s a pretty good place.

  4. Charlie posted the following in response to the question WHAT CAN I DO?

    Catherine asked me to follow up on your question here about what we all can do in the areas energy and resource use, so I’ll do my best to start in on that big question for you.

    First, there are two parts to responding to the waste in how we conduct ourselves – the direct reductions of your own household’s energy and resource use, and the indirect reductions in the energy and resource use of the economy that come from changes your daily consumption habits. The first category is pretty easy to describe, even if sometimes relatively expensive to carry out. The second category is quite comprehensive and requires a certain level of mindfulness about the impacts of what buy and how we use it.

    Let’s assume that the first category includes energy use by one’s home and by one’s transportation arrangements. Most of our building infrastructure in this country (about two-thirds) was built prior to 1990, when building energy codes in many states began to proliferate. California was the first state to enact such a code, in 1975, in response to the 1973 oil “crisis.” Until then energy was considered both plentiful and not terribly expensive. Neither of those descriptors is true anymore, if they ever were.

    In my case, when I bought a home a little bit ago, I made sure it was one that was very energy efficient, which it has turned out to be. If you don’t live in such a home, but would like to, there are things you can do, but most of the changes that are needed in most homes are fairly expensive. There are four distinct areas to address: insulation levels in the floor, walls, and ceilings; windows; air leakage; and the heating/cooling and water heating systems. Air-sealing is usually addressed when insulation levels are upgraded. To a great extent, insulation levels are limited by the the way the home’s structure was built – a 2×4 wall holds 2 inches less insulation than a 2×6 wall, which means the only option for more insulation is adding it on over the outside of the home’s sheathing – an expensive but very effective proposition. Usually adding more insulation in an attic is pretty easy, and air-sealing of the attic floor before doing that is an important step. Last I knew, adding insulation to the existing floor, wall or ceiling structure (the ceiling insulation often blown in) cost $1-$2/sq ft, installed.

    If you have single-pane windows or what are called “double clear” windows (double-pane, but with no low-emissivity coating, which most new windows have had since 1992 or so), then replacing those windows with new low-e windows is a big step to save quite a lot of energy and improves indoor comfort pretty dramatically in both the winter and summer. Air-sealing around the window rough openings occurs with replacement, too. The significant amount of air that leaves a home through the attic often comes in around the windows and doors. This weatherization measure, again, is pretty expensive. The cost of new windows depends mostly on the frame type (in order of cost – vinyl, fiberglass, or wood), but also on operator type (single-hung, double-hung, slider, casement, fixed, etc.) and ranges from $20 to $75 per sq ft, installed. Pretty much all new windows have a good low-e coating. That coating prevents radiant energy from leaving the home and prevents radiant energy from entering the home during the summer – hence the improvement in comfort.

    Air-sealing can be relatively inexpensive, especially if you have a few big sources of air leakage. Removing and replacing the trim around windows and doors can allow sealing those sources of leakage, and attics usually have a lot of sources of leakage that can be fairly easily fixed (around electrical wiring, lighting fixtures, plumbing piping, etc.). Pretty much everything that comes up into the attic from below has a hole that’s a lot bigger than what goes through the hole, which can be sealed up with a spray foam product. The stack effect – the rising of warm air at the top of the structure and replacement of that air with cold air from around the bottom of the structure is a strong and continuous driving force in the winter, and just capping the exit points in the attic can prevent a lot of air from coming in around the bottom.

    The last area to address is the water heating and space conditioning systems. Heat pumps are by far the best and most efficient technology for those end uses, but they’re not cheap. And the less expensive your electricity, the harder it is to justify the cost economically. And things seem to have gotten worse (a good bit more expensive) since the plandemic arrived. In many homes, depending on where your water heater is located, a heat pump water heater (HPWH) is pretty easy to retrofit, but the installed cost these days can exceed $2,000, with half of that being the cost of the water heater itself. The best heat pump space conditioning systems are variable speed heat pumps, many of which are called mini-splits – split-system heat pumps with capacities ranging from 3/4 of a ton to 5 tons. The furnace you have, of whatever sort, can usually be replaced with the indoor unit (air handler) of the heat pump system, fed by the outdoor unit. Heat pumps are just air conditioning systems that are reversible. The best of the these systems can hold their full capacity down to 5 degrees F, and so don’t need any electric resistance back-up. You can find a specification that points to the best systems here: https://neep.org/sites/default/files/media-files/cold_climate_air_source_heat_pump_specification_- _version_4.0_final_1.pdf . Tennessee is in Region IV. You can access the products that meet the high performance specs here: https://ashp.neep.org/#!/ 

    All of these weatherization and equipment measures have utility incentives in many parts of the country. I don’t know about Tennesee specifically, but installers usually know about the incentives available, and you can check on your utility’s web site to see about the various incentives they offer for efficiency work. Occasionally there are also tax incentives for some things, and installers will often know about those, too.

    The second area – indirect energy and resource use is more challenging to address. I tend to put these considerations into a few categories: waste generation, which includes the huge category of packaging waste; transportation; chemistry; and product lifetime.

    I’m pretty picky about what I buy, and who I buy it from, and have been for most of my life. I try never to buy anything on line, especially from companies like Amazon (I started boycotting them when all they sold was books), partly because the packaging and transportation waste associated with such companies is huge and partly because I always buy from local merchants. Another huge source of waste in buying from such behemoths is that you don’t get to actually see or fit what you’re buying until you receive it, and a huge fraction of what people receive is sent back – another huge source of waste. In addition, if you stuff from a place like Home Despot or Loew’s, and you take it back for any reason, it often just ends up in a dumpster rather than being put back on the shelf. In fact, Home Despot employees at one point were in the habit of mining what went into the dumpsters and selling it on line to supplement their income. I don’t know if that’s still happening, but that sort of waste tends not to happen so much with small, locally owned businesses, who can’t afford that kind of wasteful behavior, and will take the trouble to put returns back on the shelf. Also, the transportation energy waste associated with companies like UPS or Fed Ex is just huge, but that’s a topic to address all by itself. In addition, you can pay cash at local merchants, which I’ve been doing for all purchases under $300 (which is almost all of my purchases) for about 30 years now.

    I also try to buy high-quality stuff that lasts a long time, or that can be repaired or upgraded by myself or a local person. That means i shop at garage and estate sales a lot when I decide I need something important. In fact, the biggest single factor causing the immense waste, of both energy and resources, is the short lifetime of what we buy, especially in the case of “technology.”

    For transportation, I just try to drive as little as possible and fly as little as possible (a much easier decision of late). I drive cars and trucks until they’re no longer repairable (typically until they’re more than 20 years old and have more than 300,000 miles on them. I maintain my stuff really well, to make it last longer with fewer repairs. Maintenance is important. I combine trips when I do errands and buy some things in larger quantities so as not to have to make multiple trips to keep stocked up when it comes to things you just can’t be out of (like toilet paper or basic cleaning supplies).

    As you can see, this is a pretty big set of questions you raised, and I hope this at least gives you a start on some answers. The watchwords I apply to everything I do are LESS and FEWER. In the case of pharmaceuticals, since the 1980s, the word I apply is NONE, so I save a lot of money there. Let me know if you have specific questions that I failed to answer and I’ll get right back to you. Charlie

  5. very different view to what most have on these forums (including myself). That the CO2 levels are not anthropogenic

    1. sorry, I meant are anthropogenic! Certainly makes it easier to justify a depopulation agenda.

Comments are closed.