The current state of the Ukraine war

 

Recently Tucker Carlson interviewed Erik Prince, founder of Blackwater, in an extended dialog over the Ukraine war and several related issues.  It's almost two hours long, but it's very worthwhile to take the time to listen and think about it.  You'll find the entire podcast here.  Highly recommended.

Real Clear Politics published part of the podcast, Erik Prince's views on the Russia-Ukraine war, that I found very sobering.  I daresay Mr. Prince is far more accurate in his assessment than most of the talking heads we're seeing in the mainstream media.  Here's an excerpt.

TUCKER CARLSON: So, yeah, I mean, he's a child, obviously. And like an angry destructive child. But what happens? Like, where does this go? We send another $60 billion to Ukraine.

ERIK PRINCE: Most of that money goes to five major U.S. defense contractors to replace at five times the cost, what the weapons cost that we already sent the Ukrainians. Meaning, you know, if we send them something that was built 10 years ago, well, now it's gonna cost four and five times as much. So, again, it's a massive grift paid by a Pentagon that doesn't know how to buy stuff cost-effectively. It doesn't change the outcome of the battle.

As the fields dry, it's May now, coming up on tank season. Weather still matters in warfare. If you have a wet, snow-covered farm field, it's very muddy, very gooey. Not great for tanks, mud season, I think the Russians call it the great slush. That's done now.

As June comes, it'll be game on and I think the Russian bear is hungry, and they're gonna have a time. So the war should have been ended. It never should have started. They should have made a deal, and froze the lines six months into it. But the Biden administration believed that all this American weaponry would have saved the day.

It hasn't. And it's ugly. And you know, the Russian commanders are not idiots. They know their history. The Battle of Kursk, which happened just North of where the fighting is now was the largest tank battle in history. It was the last offensive effort of the German army against the Soviets. They tried to push from the north and south on this salient. It was a bulge and the Russians knew they were coming. So they built lots of lines of defenses. It's the same thing they've done now, that they did last summer, which ate up all that equipment.

And now the Ukrainians are very thin. They've had a lot of corruption issues. All the defenses that were supposed to be built by the Ukrainians are much smaller or non-existent. So now it's allowing maneuver and especially as the tanks, as the fields dry and you can maneuver, it's gonna be a very ugly summer.

TUCKER CARLSON: What do you think the Russians want?

ERIK PRINCE: I'd say now they want to absolutely humiliate the West and make sure that they never have a problem with Ukraine again.

TUCKLER CARLSON: And that seems achievable. So, what happens to Ukraine?

ERIK PRINCE:I don't know if it survives as an independent country. If they take Odessa, if they take the ability for Ukraine to export its grain, that really threatens the long-term economic viability.

Maybe it goes back to -- look, Western Ukraine used to be part of Poland, right? Eastern Ukraine used to be part of Russia. Maps move depending on you know, military victories drive diplomatic breakthroughs. And right now the Russians are winning and they're going to have a very good summer.

TUCKER CARLSON: Is there anybody who is knowledgeable on this subject who believes Ukraine can "win," which is to say, push Russian troops all the way back to the old Russian border?

ERIK PRINCE: I didn't really believe it ever. I don't know who's advising the White House at this point or who they're listening to, but they probably need to change out their advisor list.

There's more at the link.  Highly recommended reading, and even more recommended is to listen to the entire podcast.  It's worth your time and attention.

Peter

Even small fuel canisters can be deadly

 

I'm sure many readers saw on TV news the violent explosion of a small SUV in Los Angeles last week.

An SUV parked in a Van Nuys parking lot on Thursday night suddenly exploded after the driver lit a cigarette next to some propane canisters he stored inside. 

Firefighters and police rushed to a supermarket parking lot in the 7200 block of Van Nuys Boulevard after receiving a call about an SUV that exploded around 10:30 p.m., police said. When first responders arrived, the man told them he had been trying to light a cigarette when the explosion happened. Investigators said he was living in the vehicle during the explosion. 

He suffered minor injuries and was taken to a nearby hospital, according to the Los Angeles Police Department.

Pieces of the parked vehicle flew in every direction, one of which lodged into a nearby tree. The explosion left the Toyota SUV mostly in mangled pieces.

There's more at the link.  Here's what it looked like.

I was interested in the report because I've had a lot of experience with explosions (some of them assisted by me, others not).  The damage to the SUV was impressive, but not as great as I'd expect if a typical 20-pound propane tank - the sort used to fuel most outdoor gas barbecue grills - blew up.  That would probably have entirely demolished the vehicle.  I reached out to a couple of contacts in the Los Angeles area, and after some sleuthing, they informed me that the culprit was almost certainly a butane or propane fuel canister for a small camping stove, the sort many of us own for picnics or emergency cooking.  Both are illustrated below.

It's possible, they tell me, that more than one of those cans was present, and went up by sympathetic detonation in the explosion.

That illustrates the very real danger of using such fuel canisters in confined spaces.  They're as bad as a hand grenade if they go off.  If the victim had been inside the vehicle, rather than standing next to it, he probably would not have survived - or, if he had, the pressure injuries to his internal organs might have proved fatal in due course.

That made me roust out my canisters of fuel and check them.  To my annoyance, some of the small butane canisters showed quite a lot of rust - something I hadn't expected, because they'd been stored in climate-controlled conditions inside a plastic tote to keep out dampness.  You can bet your boots I discarded them at once (or, rather, put them aside to be handed in to our local dump as hazardous waste), and I'm going to replace them with new canisters (and check the replacements more often for any recurrence of the problem).  A rusted canister of gas under pressure simply can't be trusted.  (That's why higher-pressure propane cylinders are legally required - in the USA at least - to be tested after 10 years, and discarded after 15.)

So, for those of us using or storing such equipment, let this be a wake-up call.  They can be very dangerous if misused or poorly stored.

Peter

The legal shenanigans being employed to convict President Trump

 

The partisan political nature of the prosecution of President Trump on so many charges, in so many venues, is beyond any doubt whatsoever.  That's made clear by the preliminary instructions to the jury in New York.

To find Trump guilty of felony-level falsification of business documents, the jury must unanimously find that Trump falsified the documents in order to commit or conceal a separate crime. But the jurors do not all have to agree on what that separate crime was, Justice Juan Merchan ruled.

. . .

In other words: If some jurors believe that Trump falsified business documents solely to cover up a tax crime, while others believe that he falsified business documents solely to cover up an election crime, the jury can still convict Trump on the felony-level falsifying-documents charges, despite disagreeing on the predicate crimes.

There's more at the link.

This is beyond belief.  It demonstrates beyond any doubt whatsoever the complete and utter disregard for the law that we see in Judge Merchan's courtroom.  Consider:

• In order to be convicted, one must be found guilty of a specific crime.
• The jury instruction above tells jurors that they don't have to agree on what specific crime was committed.  In other words, President Trump might not be convicted of a specific crime at all (because that would require a jury verdict to that effect).
• However, despite there being no specific conviction, the jury will be allowed to find President Trump guilty of falsifying documents in order to conceal a specific crime.
• But . . . if no specific crime was committed (and, in the absence of a jury ruling to that effect, that will be the legal reality) then how can President Trump be convicted of falsifying documents to conceal a crime?  If the act is not specified, and no conviction is handed down, then in legal terms he is not guilty of any crime, and therefore there is no crime to conceal.

This is so bizarre it defies belief.  Any half-way competent lawyer can see that in a heartbeat.

The judge's conduct is well summed up by former Professor Alan Dershowitz:

“This judge has committed more reversible errors in the one day I was in the courtroom than I’ve seen in years and years of practicing law. It’s just an outrage,” Dershowitz stated.

I think that if President Trump is convicted by this kangaroo court under such pretexts, it will virtually guarantee his victory in the November 2024 elections . . . if his enemies allow him to live that long.  If he's incarcerated on such flimsy grounds, one can only assume that it's to create the conditions under which he might suffer a terminal "accident" or "assault" in prison, to finally remove any possibility of his winning re-election.  Frankly, I wouldn't put that past his political enemies.  Their desperation to derail his campaign is beyond clear.

As always, I note that I am not a fan of President Trump, and I'd prefer a more balanced candidate in November.  However, that's beside the point.  Whatever one's views of President Trump, the fact that he's being treated like this by our so-called impartial, balanced judicial system is cause for the deepest concern.

Peter

Two very narrow escapes by/from light aircraft

 

I think several people have every reason to celebrate this weekend.  First off, in Australia, a light aircraft carrying a family experienced engine failure, and made a skin-of-their-teeth landing at a local airport - missing trees and rooftops by literally inches.  (A tip o' the hat to Australian reader Andrew for sending me the link to this video report.)

The pilot appears to be a former South African, like myself - his name and accent are unmistakeable.  Kudos to him for a remarkable (and very fortunate) piece of piloting.

Next, closer to home, a skydiving flight narrowly avoided tragedy.

A pilot and six passengers on a skydiving flight jumped from a small plane just before the aircraft crashed in a Missouri field on Saturday, according to federal authorities.

The single-engine Cessna U206C crashed at about 1 p.m. near the Butler Memorial Airport, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) told Fox News Digital in a statement. 

The agency said preliminary information indicates the plane was flying a “skydiving mission,” and that the pilot and all passengers escaped the plane before the crash.

. . .

Paramedics treated the pilot and passengers at the scene before they were all released, the sheriff’s office said.

First responders found the aircraft wreckage in a hayfield east of the airport’s runways, according to the sheriff’s office, which described the plane as a “total loss.”

There's more at the link.

This accident surprised me because the pilot was wearing a parachute.  Skydiving pilots often don't wear one, partly due to space considerations (they typically cram as many skydivers as possible into the aircraft, leaving minimal room for the pilot) and partly because it usually takes time to get all the skydivers out of the plane, so that in an emergency, the pilot might not have time to get out himself.  (To illustrate, a recent Swiss skydiving aircraft accident killed the pilot.)  Congratulations to all concerned on their survival, and to the pilot on being more than usually safety-conscious.

I've flown many thousands of miles in single-engine light aircraft, bopping around the African continent;  and my wife learned to fly in Alaska, and knows what it's like to land on sandbars, moraines, tundra and other "interesting" surfaces.  We both have a lively appreciation for the dangers and difficulties involved in using small aircraft.  In both these cases, we're very glad that nobody was harmed.

Peter

Memes that made me laugh 211

 

Gathered from around the Internet over the past week.  Click any image for a larger view.

Sunday morning music

 

Here's a treat for the older farts among us.  Who can forget the Chad Mitchell Trio and their satirical take on life, the universe and everything?

Their best-known song is almost certainly Lizzie Borden, concerning a young lady accused (but later acquitted) of murder.

Remember that the Trio was performing during the 1960's, when the draft for military service was a very hot topic of discussion.  All sorts of excuses were put forward in an effort to evade the draft.

The sporting world did not escape their satire.

And, of course, political issues of the day reared their ugly heads in some of their songs (only to be disemboweled with satirical glee).

They also performed many traditional folk songs and sea shanties.  A great many of their songs may be found on YouTube.

Peter

Healing: two steps forward, one step back, rinse, repeat

 

After two kidney procedures so far, my state of health is definitely improved;  but there's still a ways to go, including at least one more procedure (probably late next week or early the following week).  The pain level bounces higher after each procedure, then gradually diminishes over time.  Last Monday, after the second procedure, and through Tuesday, my pain levels were very high, so much so that I was popping some serious pain pills like they were M&M's.  By Wednesday it had retreated to a point that I felt able to do light work around the house once more, and at present (during the small hours of Saturday morning) it's bearable with over-the-counter analgesics rather than prescription medication.  That varies on an hourly basis, of course.  I daresay by this evening I'll have hit the hard stuff at least once.

While my kidney is the main focus at present, there's also the deterioration in my spine to deal with.  That's going to be a lot more complicated, and a lot more expensive, thanks to disputes between Workers Comp and my medical insurance provider over who's responsible for paying for it.  Lawyers will almost certainly have to get involved.  In order to get things moving, I'll probably have to pay for the surgery myself, and then recover what costs I can as matters progress.  If I wait for the lawyers, I'll never get it done!  I'm preparing a GiveSendGo campaign to raise funds for that, which I'll kick off next week.

It's taken me a couple of years to get to this point, and it won't be resolved overnight;  but the kidney procedures are dealing with one major problem, and the solution to the second (and more serious) problem is in sight, pending funds to pay for it.  My way of dealing with it has been to keep chipping away at the legal and medical facade of the professionals who handle this sort of thing, insisting on their keeping me informed, demanding copies of all test results (which illustrate all too well that they sometimes tell you verbally things that are not confirmed or borne out by the tests), and generally insisting that my health is first and foremost in my hands, not theirs.  (For some reason doctors don't like that perspective!  They seem to regard such patients as "pushy".  Well, when you've had as many encounters with medical professionals as I have, you learn the hard way that they don't necessarily have your best interests at heart, but rather what's best for the medical profession.  To overcome that, judicious application of the old idiom "The squeaky wheel gets the grease" is the only way to respond.  Squeak louder!)

I'll try to get back to regular blogging hours next week, until the next procedure, which will require another interruption to our regular schedule.  Hopefully that will be the last for a while, until the next surgery in a few months' time, if all goes well.  Thanks for sticking with me, and for all your thoughts and prayers.

Peter

The last resting place of a submarine legend

 

I was astonished - and pleased, of course - to learn that the final resting place of the submarine USS Harder, sunk in 1944, and of her legendary commanding officer, Sam Dealy, has been discovered.  Here's an extended video report.

Cdr. Dealey became famous in the Submarine Service (and probably equally notorious to the Japanese) for his deliberate attacks on escort vessels, taunting or luring them into approaching his submarine and then firing a "down the throat" attack right at their bows.  He sank at least five, and possibly six, Japanese destroyers in this manner, as well as his other victims.  His posthumous Medal of Honor citation attests to his success.

For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty as commanding officer of the U.S.S. Harder during her 5th war patrol in Japanese-controlled waters. Floodlighted by a bright moon and disclosed to an enemy destroyer escort which bore down with intent to attack. Comdr. Dealey quickly dived to periscope depth and waited for the pursuer to close range, then opened fire, sending the target and all aboard down in flames with his third torpedo. Plunging deep to avoid fierce depth charges, he again surfaced and, within nine minutes after sighting another destroyer, had sent the enemy down tail first with a hit directly amidship. Evading detection, he penetrated the confined waters off Tawi Tawi with the Japanese Fleet base six miles away and scored death blows on two patrolling destroyers in quick succession. With his ship heeled over by concussion from the first exploding target and the second vessel nose-diving in a blinding detonation, he cleared the area at high speed. Sighted by a large hostile fleet force on the following day, he swung his bow toward the lead destroyer for another "down-the-throat" shot, fired three bow tubes, and promptly crash-dived to be terrifically rocked seconds later by the exploding ship as the Harder passed beneath. This remarkable record of five vital Japanese destroyers sunk in five short-range torpedo attacks attests the valiant fighting spirit of Comdr. Dealey and his indomitable command.

Cdr. Dealey was one of the star performers in the Submarine Service, and his loss - and that of his submarine and crew - was a severe blow.  They were commemorated with the launch of the Tang class submarine USS Harder in 1951.  I hope the discovery of the wreck of the USS Harder will be an opportunity to remember their deeds anew.

Peter

Heh

 

Courtesy of The Free Press's newsletter this morning, a cartoon by David Mamet (clickit to biggit):

So much for sustainability!  Now what about eatability?

Peter

Artificial intelligence and cybercrime

 

In a recent issue of his regular Global Macro Update newsletters, Ed d'Agostino of Mauldin Economics interviewed Karim Hijazi, a cybercrime expert, about the current state of that field and the growing involvement of AI.  It's a long, multipage newsletter, so I won't even try to go into all it says.  Here's an excerpt to whet your appetite.

Ed D'Agostino:  What is AI's role in all of this? Has it impacted effectiveness of bad actors at all?

Karim Hijazi:  It has. I hate to say it. AI has probably been most embraced in terms of its creativity and its use by nefarious actors or threat actors because as usual, unfortunately, because it affords them the ability to force multiply themselves. That's the number one reason. What they would otherwise need a bunch of people to do they can do... one person can do a whole lot of work with an AI tool that generates an incredible amount of not only the narratives for a phishing email that we talked about, but also the malware itself. It'll actually write the code for the malware that is generally pretty well written. And there's a few tweaks here and there, but what would take weeks or months is done in days.

Ed D'Agostino:  Can you talk a little bit, Karim, about what's at stake here? I mean, we talk about me sitting here in my remote solo office, I get a phishing email. I'm not hooked up to a big company network. Maybe I lose a little bit of data. I think that's how people think of it. Really what we're talking about is the country's critical infrastructure is at risk. What does that look like and how is it at risk?

Karim Hijazi:  Exactly. The everyday person doesn't feel like it can affect them. A lot of where individuals are worried about when it comes to hackers and threats is their identities, maybe their credit card information, their social security number, back to identity. But what's interesting is that in the world we're in now, the interconnectivity between even your computer and mine, by definition, there is one, right? You're looking into your screen and I'm looking into my screen, my camera's picking up my image and sending it to you. There's effectively a link between us. So if you want to think of it from that perspective, right now we're connected. And so if there is, in theory, something on my machine, God forbid, and it wanted to sort of figure out, "Who's Ed?," and it goes into my email and it lurks around and it goes, "Ooh, Ed's got a lot of connections on LinkedIn," or, "He's got a really great follower base on YouTube. He's a good target for me to proliferate myself even further to his audience." So you think about it, that's the first step in terms of its reconnaissance risk. When you start thinking about yourself as a non-player when it comes to why you'd be interesting to a threat actor, you'd be surprised.

The second thing that's really interesting is this is just a micro version of the macro problem, which is supply chain. Supply-chain and third-party ecosystems are the number one challenge that we're having today because a small company leads to bigger company. A bigger company leads to government or critical infrastructure. The pathway, the daisy chain, if you will, is small company, bigger company, critical infrastructure. And from that small company… it could be a work-from-home individual that never left home after COVID because that was the policy of the company but because there's no security protocols at home, they're the easiest targets in the world to get into. The VPN is simply a hypodermic needle into the corporation. The corporation is now access to many other organizations and so on. That's just the super small taxonomy or treeing out of essentially the connections out all the way from the individual to government or critical infrastructure, unfortunately.

Ed D'Agostino:  I think you'd mentioned that some really big cutting-edge technology has been bled out of corporations through this sort of process. Quantuum was one that we talked about yesterday. I thought that we were... I was sitting here looking at IBM thinking, "If IBM gets Quantuum right, this stock is going to go into the moon, maybe we should be looking at it. They seem to be the leaders." And then I spoke with you and you're like, "Well, China's already got all that."

Karim Hijazi:  Unfortunately, China as a nation-state actor has focused heavily on intellectual property theft for years. That's definitely not a new agenda of theirs. It's been their focus for a very long time. I think we all know that from headline news. The problem is they've done it in a multipronged approach. They did it with implants of people, long-term "coverts" through academia that they've had planted for very long periods of time. They've augmented it with things like software and access to environments, through harvesting information electronically. And they've conned people into sharing information as well. That's the other part of this is that they've done a really good job with that. The other thing that's interesting is what people fail to recognize is that nation-state adversaries aren't islands unto themselves. They tend to cooperate. If a Russian or North Korean or Iranian nation-state actor has an initial access into something, they'll broker it to another country for a price. There may be one group in a nationstate adversary that has much better access to something than the other group does, but the other group can pay them for it, and they'll get in.

Unfortunately, there's been an onslaught onto our country in such a way that makes it very difficult for us to sort of manage all those beachheads. And so the asymmetry is very challenging, and it ties back to your AI conversation, which is how has that added to it? Just that, it's added this extra level of pressurization onto the systems that we believe were protecting us, and they are indeed failing. Sorry to be doom and gloom, but...

There's much more at the link.  The entire newsletter is well worth reading if you're interested in computer and information systems security.

It's startling to realize how widespread and prevalent cybercrime has become.  It's far more than just "phishing" e-mails or attempts to listen in on communications channels.  It's now become an exercise in how to kinetically affect an entire nation or sector of a national economy.  In another part of the interview, Karim Hijazi notes:

There's things like water treatment facilities that can have water levels… the pH change or the potability change just ever so slightly that'll cause a mass dysentery effect. Then you've got a flood onto the pressurization of a hospital environment in a specific location. And then as we've seen over the course of the pandemic, you conduct a ransomware attack and put the hospitals in a pressurization state where they can't function unless they pay a ransom, and you can really cause a cascading effect. And that's the doom and gloom scenario, of course. But you're completely right, the big concern is if there's that much access to these environments, what can they effectively do? And how much have we given to technology to take over?

And unfortunately, I know I said AI for the third time in this conversation, but here again is where our reliance on it and our over-excitedness to deliver the responsibility over to it, may be a little foolhardy at this point because once it's in the hands of something that really doesn't have any kind of emotionality or ability to identify... For example, in my company, I do employ a lot of automation and AI, but I also use human intuition and experience and talent to identify these problems that simply, at this point, can't be done through technology. And unfortunately for cost savings and a variety of other reasons, people are choosing to go in the direction where it's all automated. And automation's fantastic when there's nothing coming at it to use it maliciously, but when it can be leveraged against you, you’ve got an issue.

Worrying thoughts.  Again, if you want to learn more about this field and how it might affect any or all of us, I highly recommend reading the full interview for yourself.  I also suggest you subscribe to the newsletter (it's free).  Mr. d'Agostino comes up with some very interesting and useful insights.

Peter

A few disaster recovery considerations coming out of Houston, TX

 

I'm sure most of my readers are aware of the storm that hit the Houston, Texas area last week.  Power transmission pylons crumpled as if they were so much tinfoil, and hundreds of thousands of people are still without electricity.  Floods have complicated travel over much of the region, and haven't drained off yet.  Spare a thought and a prayer for those affected.

Talking to friends in that area, I've been struck by the additional problems being experienced by people with breathing difficulties - asthma, COPD or the like.  I'm hearing reports that those conditions are being aggravated by the humidity down there, which is about as high as it gets in the continental USA (and still is not at its full summer height).  I'm told some patients have had to be admitted to hospital for breathing assistance, while others who rely on electrically powered technology like HEPA filters and CPAP machines are finding it very difficult to cope without them.  Many are using generators, but after several days are running short of fuel for them - and fuel isn't yet reaching local gas stations in the quantities required.  My comments in earlier posts about emergency preparations, suggesting that we add gasoline to our supplies, are confirmed, I guess.

Of interest is that small camping-style "power stations" with solar panels for recharging are proving very effective indeed, more so than I would have believed.  I expected whole-house backup solutions with high-capacity power stations would work well, but I thought the smaller versions wouldn't provide enough power to be useful for long-term outages.  Turns out that's a matter of quantity.  Because the small power stations are relatively low-cost, some people have three or four of them, plus one or two solar panels for recharging.  They can use one to power a HEPA filter, another for a CPAP device, and have one or two in reserve, either being recharged from solar power or standing by ready to replace one already in use.  That's good to know, and good for our budget as well.  There are some real bargains in smaller power stations right now (see, for example, at the time of writing, this 1400W Ecoflow DELTA mini for $549, or this 800W Bluetti EB70S for $399), if you need one.  The larger units, putting out thousands of watts, are also getting cheaper over time;  for a whole house backup or the ability to run fridges and freezers, washing machines, air conditioners, etc. is important, they're still a lot more expensive than generators, but don't need fuel and are whisper-quiet.  Those can be real game-changers, particularly for longer power outages.

A darker side to the power outages in the greater Houston area is that I'm hearing about prowlers, sometimes gangs of them, making their way through darkened neighborhoods, looking for what they can steal.  Assaults have been reported, and attempts to steal generators (because houses using them can be easily identified by the lights, exhaust fumes, etc.)  I'm informed that local cops are, in some cases, tackling the bigger problems around them and ignoring cases where home-owners defend their families and property.  This is Texas, after all, and people are generally pretty self-reliant.  As long as there are no bodies untidily littering the landscape, attracting unwanted attention, there's no harm and no foul.

Part of that security problem, of course, is the lack of working security systems and external lights.  A lot of people rely on burglar alarms, break-in detectors, security lights outside their home, and so on.  None of them work in the absence of power.  I understand some homes that stood out in times past thanks to their security systems (after all, why invest in such systems unless you have something valuable to protect?) have been targeted by gangs after the power went out.  One hopes they had good manual backup defensive and protective systems.  (Again, this is Texas, so that's not unlikely.  I'd hate to estimate how long gang-bangers would last on my street if they tried anything.  I daresay they'd be dealt with in a very short time.  Neighbors here look out for each other.)

Anyway, things are slowly getting back to normal in the Houston area.  Let's hope they have a respite this hurricane season, so they don't have to do it all over again a few months from now.

Peter

The dilemma: get more lithium for favored EV's - but at the cost of increased oil fracking

 

I had to laugh at this report.

Almost two centuries after California's gold rush, the United States is on the brink of a lithium rush. As demand for the material skyrockets, government geologists are rushing to figure out where the precious element is hiding.

In September 2023, scientists funded by a mining company reported finding what could be the largest deposit of lithium in an ancient US supervolcano. Now public researchers on the other side of the country have uncovered another untapped reservoir – one that could cover nearly half the nation's lithium demands.

It's hiding in wastewater from Pennsylvania's gas fracking industry.

Lithium is arguably the most important element in the nation's renewable energy transition – the material of choice for electric vehicle batteries. And yet, there is but one large-scale lithium mine in the US, meaning for the moment the country has to import what it needs.

. . .

Expanding America's lithium industry, however, is highly controversial, as mining can destroy natural environments, leach toxic chemicals, and intrude on sacred Indigenous land.

At the same time, however, lithium-ion batteries are considered a crucial technology in the world's transition to renewable energy, storing electricity generated by the wind and the Sun. Finding a source of lithium that doesn't cause more environmental destruction than necessary is key, but a clean solution is complicated.

Pennsylvania sits on a vein of sedimentary rock known as the Marcellus Shale, which is rich in natural gas. The geological foundation was deposited almost 400 million years ago by volcanic activity, and it contains lithium from volcanic ash.

Over vast stretches of time, deep groundwater has dissolved the lithium in these rocks, essentially "mining the subsurface", according to Justin Mackey, a researcher at the National Energy Technology Laboratory in Pennsylvania.

Mackey and his colleagues have now found that when wastewater is dredged up from the deep by fracking activities, it contains an astonishing amount of lithium.

There's more at the link.

Looks like the irresistible force is about to collide headlong with the immovable object, in environmental terms.  The US government and the tree-huggers want to eliminate as much fossil fuel as possible, and are therefore pushing electric vehicles as the solution.  On the other hand, if they want to do that, they have to have lithium for the EV's batteries:  and a major source for lithium now appears to be the fracking technologies they've been trying to ban for years, on the grounds that they're a major source of pollution and other problems.

Which do they want most?  Abundant batteries?  Or abundant gasoline as a derivative of abundant batteries?  Will they do without the latter, even though it means that obtaining the former will be more difficult and much more expensive?  Or will they fuel the vehicles of those of us who reject EV's as being insufficiently developed to be practical, in order to have more EV's to sell to those who want them?

Oh, the irony is delicious . . .

Peter

Those pesky unintended consequences again...

 

It turns out that re-scheduling marijuana to a lower drug classification has left the trucking industry with a big problem and few options to solve it.

The trucking industry is raising concerns about President Joe Biden downgrading marijuana to a lower level of drug classification — especially how the move could threaten highway safety.

The American Trucking Associations’ and Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association’s questions about reclassifying cannabis from a Schedule I to a Schedule III drug include how it would affect carriers’ ability to test drivers for the substance.

“Absent an explicit allowance for continued employer marijuana testing of safety-sensitive workers, this change may have considerable negative consequences for highway safety and safety-sensitive industries,” the ATA said in a letter to three federal department heads.

There's more at the link.

It really is a big problem.  Marijuana can affect one's reflexes, concentration, etc. just as badly as alcohol, particularly when it comes to synthetic marijuana or a high-strength varietal.  Cops I speak to tell me it's already a very large problem in big cities, where the majority of drug users are to be found, and even in smaller towns it's making its presence felt.

I don't know how they're going to handle testing and disciplinary requirements.  If marijuana is officially no longer considered as dangerous, can drivers be fired for using it?  They (or their lawyers) could argue that if using it is not against the law, the drivers cannot be punished for using it.  And how does one measure the actual level of intoxication?  The alcohol content of blood can be measured, providing an objective result that can be used in court if necessary, but I'm not aware of any similar measurement that can quantify the "level of marijuana" one's smoked or eaten.

It's all very well to "liberalize" marijuana legislation to cater to society's changing views on its use, but if it adds (or makes worse) more danger on the roads, that's anything but OK.  It's yet another worry when one's behind the wheel . . .

Peter

Still here...

 

I'm alive, although not kicking - that would hurt too much!  The procedure yesterday turned into a marathon session, and there will have to be a third in a couple of weeks' time, because things were rather nastier than had shown on X-rays, CT scans and ultrasound.  Nevertheless, progress was made, and I'm assured by the specialist that given time, all should be well.  If he's right, great:  if not, I'll lose that kidney before the end of the year.  We'll see.

Otherwise, I'm in a great deal of pain, moving very slowly, and trying to possess myself in patience.  That's not easy!  I expect I'll be moving more freely by the end of the week.

Blogging will be occasional for the next day or two, depending on how much energy I can find to get up and how long I can sit at my computer.

Peter

Memes that made me laugh 210

 

Gathered around the Internet over the past week.  Click any image for a larger view.

More next week.

Peter

Still no Saturday Snippet while health issues continue

 

As for the past couple of weeks, my pain levels preclude sitting for hours transcribing part of a book, or even reading a lot.  My next medical procedure is on Monday, May 20, and I guess I'll need a couple of days to catch my breath before picking up normal blogging again.  I hope the specialist will get done everything he wants to do during that procedure, but he's already warned me that if there are too many complications, he'll do a partial job and go back in a third time to finish it.  Let's hope and pray that won't be necessary!  I'm already tired of this . . .

Anyway, please amuse yourselves with the bloggers listed in the sidebar.  They write good, too!

Thanks.

Peter

Buyer beware (yet again)

 

To my absolute lack of surprise, I learned that cruise lines have been carefully failing to inform their customers of additional fees, charges, imposts, etc. on top of their advertised prices.  For once, California is doing the right thing by forcing them to disclose these charges.

Starting July 1, operators including Royal Caribbean International, Carnival Cruise Line, Celebrity Cruises and Princess Cruises will include the cost of port expenses, taxes and other fees in the price that potential passengers see. The additional charges can tack on more than $100 to the fare, or even double the cheapest base price on some short itineraries.

The changes kick in when California’s “Honest Pricing Law” goes into effect, restricting companies that do business in the state from advertising a price that is lower than what a consumer will ultimately have to pay.

. . .

For now, cruise lines like Carnival and Royal Caribbean promote bargain sailings, such as a seven-night Western Caribbean cruise “starting at” an average of $437 per person. But that number does not reflect the nearly $164 more that’s required for taxes, fees and port expenses and displayed in smaller print. A four-day Mexico cruise from Long Beach, Calif., shows the cheapest cabin for $234 - but the additional charges are an additional $240.

“The current ‘drip pricing’ technique where you show a low price and then tack on a lot of the extra fees later is a great attention disrupter but very misleading,” Doug Parker, founder of the podcast and news site Cruise Radio, said in an email.

Gratuities are also extra for most mainstream cruise lines, but tips will not need to be advertised up front. Cruise lines also offer optional drink or dining packages, shore excursions, and other add-ons that would increase the cost of a trip.

Parker said the cost of a seemingly inexpensive cruise can balloon with taxes, depending on the itinerary. He said the new policy will give families “a better idea on what the vacation will actually cost.”

There's more at the link.

I've been infuriated more times than I can tell to find unexplained, unauthorized charges tacked on to a bill or invoice.  Hospitals are particularly egregious offenders.  "Your procedure will cost you $4,999.99 out of pocket - your insurance pays for the rest!"  Yeah . . . and then comes the anesthetist bill, the rehab bill, the clean sheets every day bill, and all the rest of it.  Together they can add thousands of dollars to our costs, unforeseen and unbudgeted.

I'm glad this particular cesspool of financial chicanery will be drained;  but I'm willing to bet the cruise lines will find new and innovative ways to screw yet more consumer dollars out of us.  In their eyes, we're sheep to be sheared, and they're very good at shearing.

Peter

Sobering reflections on our lack of preparedness for a true emergency

 

A few articles caught my eye in recent days.  They illustrate eloquently how unprepared Americans as a whole are for a true disaster-level emergency.

First, Brandon Smith looks at mass starvation.

Because we have lived in relative security and economic affluence for so long the idea of ever having to go without food seems “laughable” to many people. When the notion of economic collapse is brought up they jeer and call it “conspiracy theory.”

Compared to the Great Depression, the US population today is completely removed from agriculture and has no idea what living off the land means. These are not things that can be learned in a few months from books and YouTube videos; they require years of experience to master.

. . .

The greater problem in terms of famine is not that individual Americans are not aware of the threat; many of them are. The problem is that our infrastructure and logistical systems are designed to fail and there’s not much the average citizen can do about it.

. . .

Growing food, hunting food and foraging food are all supplemental measures, especially in the first years of any crisis event. Without a primary emergency supply most people will not make it. Food storage has been a mainstay of civilization for thousands of years for a reason – It works. When larger secure communities are established then agriculture can return and self sustaining production makes food storage less important. Until then, what you have in your basement or your garage is the only thing that’s going to keep you alive.

There's more at the link.

Next, Michael Totten analyzes the very real risk of a catastrophic earthquake in the Pacific Northwest - one that may be many times worse than anything any of us have ever experienced.

Roughly 100 miles off the West Coast, running from Mendocino, California, to Canada’s Vancouver Island, lurks the Cascadia Subduction Zone, where the Juan de Fuca Plate is sliding beneath the North American Plate, creating the conditions for a megathrust quake 30 times stronger than the worst-case scenario along the notorious San Andreas, and 1,000 times stronger than the earthquake that killed 100,000 Haitians in 2010.

. . .

Scientists scrambled for core samples of the ocean floor just off the American coast and found turbidites—layers of tsunami debris—that date back millennia and, most recently, again, to 1700, revealing a cycle that repeats itself every 300 to 600 years. The Cascadia Subduction Zone is not quiet, after all: it triggers catastrophic megathrust quakes, on schedule. “A fault that ruptures with this big of an earthquake every few hundred years is ragingly active,” says Yumei Wang, a geotechnical engineer at the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI).

A 9.0 megathrust quake is too powerful even to be measured on the now-dated Richter scale.

. . .

“No community on the planet is adequately prepared for a major subduction zone earthquake,” observes Dan Douthit, spokesman for the Portland Bureau of Emergency Management (PBEM). The Northwest, however, and especially Oregon, is nerve-rackingly further behind than it should be. Nothing built here before 1995—which includes the vast majority of all structures, including skyscrapers, bridges, and hospitals, as well as houses—was engineered to withstand it.

Again, more at the link.

However, the really scary part comes when one puts the warnings from the two articles above into joint perspective:  in other words, how they interact with and affect each other.  A massive natural disaster like a Pacific Northwest earthquake might - probably will - cut almost all transport links from the West Coast to states further inland, and vice versa.  Emergency relief won't be able to reach disaster zones, and refugees won't be able to move away from them.  We won't be able to get at the vast agricultural and processing resources of our Western states, which together supply more than half of our fruit and vegetables;  and we won't be able to help those that produce them, meaning they'll probably be unable to produce more for a significant length of time - years rather than months.

What's more, the sudden need to reallocate transport resources - trains, 18-wheelers, etc. - to disaster relief, plus the loss of transport resources in the disaster zone, will result in a sudden and unavoidable collapse of distribution networks throughout the rest of the country.  We may have plenty of food for everyone:  but if it can't be moved from field to processing facilities to distributors to consumers, how are we going to get our hands on it?

Too many of us are prone to say, "Well, that's just fear-mongering.  There's no guarantee anything like that will happen."  Unfortunately, there is such a guarantee.  Read the article about the Pacific Northwest earthquake potential, and look at what scientists and professionals are saying about its inevitability.  It's scary.

Remember "nine meals from anarchy"?  That well-known saying appears to have been first used by Alfred Henry Lewis in 1896.  In 1932 a New Jersey newspaper noted:

How nicely civilization has become balanced is shown by the easily perceived fact that we are never more than nine meals away from anarchy. Throw an impenetrable wall around this metropolitan zone of ten million persons, prevent the people from receiving a supply of food and water for three days, and our vaunted civilization goes on the scrap heap.

In a more recent article titled with that well-known saying, Jeff Thomas pointed out:

Importantly, it’s the very unpredictability of food delivery that increases fear, creating panic and violence. And, again, none of the above is speculation; it’s a historical pattern – a reaction based upon human nature ... At that point, it would be very likely that the central government would step in and issue controls to the food industry that served political needs rather than business needs, greatly exacerbating the problem.

I said a month ago:

There's also the question of the duration of an emergency.  If it's [a major nation-wide catastrophe], then the effects will be felt for not just years, but decades.  There's no way we can stockpile enough supplies to cater for something like that.  Those who can farm, growing their own food, will have an edge:  but everyone else who survives will be doing their best to raid farms for food, so keeping it is likely to be a very serious problem.  Certainly, if we are not already growing at least some of our own food, we're very unlikely to be able to grow enough from scratch to survive.  We lack the knowledge, tools, seeds, and experience to do so.  Tempting advertisements to buy a certain brand of seed, or a particular tool, or land on which to establish an "emergency farm", are likely to benefit only those selling them.  Realistically, most of us can afford to plan, and stockpile supplies, for an emergency lasting from a few weeks to a year.  Anything beyond that . . . well, it's unlikely we'll live through it.  That's just the way it is.

Nothing in the articles linked above leads me to think differently.  Perhaps all of us should re-evaluate our own emergency preparations with that in mind.

Peter

It doesn't help to ignore reality. Sooner or later, it'll catch up with you.

 

Remember the collapse of the Surfside condo complex in Miami, Florida, almost three years ago?

On June 24, 2021, at approximately 1:22 a.m. EDT, Champlain Towers South, a 12-story beachfront condominium in the Miami suburb of Surfside, Florida, United States, partially collapsed, causing the deaths of 98 people. Four people were rescued from the rubble, but one died of injuries shortly after arriving at the hospital. Eleven others were injured. Approximately thirty-five were rescued the same day from the un-collapsed portion of the building, which was demolished ten days later.

A contributing factor under investigation is long-term degradation of reinforced concrete structural support in the basement-level parking garage under the pool deck, due to water penetration and corrosion of the reinforcing steel. The problems had been reported in 2018 and noted as "much worse" in April 2021. A $15 million program of remedial works had been approved before the collapse, but the main structural work had not started.

There's more at the link.

The full impact of that tragedy is only now becoming evident in condo complexes up and down the Florida coast.  The same neglect that led to the Surfside collapse has been found in literally hundreds of other buildings, and the repair bills are colossal - so much so that owners can't afford them.

Have a Florida condo? Can you afford a $100,000 or higher special assessment for new safety standards?

After the collapse of a Surfside Building on June 24, 2021that killed 98 people, the state passed a structural safety law that is now biting owners.

Not only are insurance rates soaring, but owners are hit with huge special assessments topping $100,000.

. . .

Those who cannot sell and don’t have the special assessment, will be evicted and their units seized for whatever the Associations can get for them.

South Florida listings have doubled in the past year to over 18,000. Few of those units will sell, and those that do sell will be at a huge haircut.

Again, more at the link.

The structural safety law is entirely necessary from any rational perspective.  Unfortunately, many of those who bought condos in Florida - some of them decades ago, when prices were far lower - are now on the hook to pay for those repairs.  Some can afford it, but others have had no choice but to try to sell their now almost valueless condos to buyers who aren't prepared to pay for the sins or omissions of the past.  Many of them are now facing bankruptcy and possible homelessness.

What I find most infuriating is that the condo associations should have carried out normal preventive maintenance over the years;  should have had their buildings inspected regularly to detect problems before they got out of control;  and should have set aside adequate financial reserves to pay to repair them.  That's nothing more than basic common sense:  but it seems few did so.  The condo owners didn't want the trouble or expense involved.  To make matters worse, many of them now affected by the problem are trying to weasel their way out of it any way they can - despite the consequences of doing so being so starkly visible to everyone concerned.

State law previously allowed condos to waive reserve funding year after year, leading many buildings ... to keep next to nothing in their coffers.

. . .

Residents still meet ... to celebrate birthdays. But now, those gatherings are often charged with owners pooling documentation in hope of finding evidence that the assessments should be lower.

Some are worried developers may already be purchasing condos in the building for a potential takeover, where a developer tries to gain control of a building to knock it down and build a newer, more luxurious one. These condo terminations are happening up and down the state’s coastline. While the rules can vary by building, if enough people vote to sell their units, the others have to follow along.

More at the link.

One can't blame the developers.  If a unit's value has plummeted thanks to the cost of repairs, of course those with money - and an eye to make more money - are going to take advantage of the situation by buying it at a fire sale price, and buying as many as they can, in order to outvote longer-term residents and make more money out of redeveloping the site and/or building.  I'm afraid that's yet another consequence of owners refusing to invest in their condos during the "golden years", and now having to pay huge sums due to their previous neglect.  What goes around, comes around.

I suppose this is yet another example of why it's foolish to trust one's home and finances to a group of owners who may not have the right priorities.  The few responsible owners who would have been willing to pay for upkeep were undoubtedly outvoted by those who preferred to minimize maintenance in order to maximize their budgets, individual and corporate.  Now that they're all in the same (sinking) boat, they don't want to acknowledge that it's ultimately their own fault.  Human nature is still as self-centered as always . . .

*Sigh*

Peter

"Machetes are like pitbulls"

 

They are indeed.  I've seen them used as fighting weapons far too many times in the Third World, and the damage that results.

Click over to Gun Free Zone's post about that, and watch the video.  WARNING:  It's not for the squeamish or faint at heart.  You'll see a hand chopped right off, among other injuries.

Keep that in mind when you're next threatened by a machete, or a sharpened garden spade, or any improvised edged weapon (not to mention conventional knives).  If you get up close and personal in a knife fight, you almost certainly will get cut, if not much more severely injured.  It goes with the territory.

That's also why I tend towards larger, heavier calibers of handgun when in environments where that sort of danger may be a threat.  I want to stop anyone heading my way with such a weapon in their hands.  Smaller calibers and cartridges may work . . . but then again, they may not.

Peter

"Panic rooms" and "safe rooms" are greatly overrated

 

An article in the New York Post set me to thinking.

New Yorkers are fortifying their homes with panic rooms and bullet-proof doors like never before over fears about crime, migrants and national turmoil — and it’s not just the city’s elite partaking in the trend.

“Not every [customer] is an ultra-rich stockbroker — a lot of them are just people, middle-class kind of people,” said Steve Humble, founder of the home-defense contractor Creative Home Engineering.

“I’d say the pandemic really kicked off an uptick. Business was really good throughout the pandemic time, and it really hasn’t slowed down,” said Humble, who specializes in top-of-the-line secret doors disguised as bookshelves, fireplaces, mirrors, blank walls and whatever else a client can think of to conceal a safety room behind them.

He is one of numerous home-defense contractors who told The Post that the past four years have been a boon for business, with New Yorkers from all walks of life shelling out thousands of dollars to outfit their homes with hidden rooms, bulletproof doors and a swath of other covert security systems to keep the baddies at bay should they come knocking.

The driving force is a decline in New Yorkers’ sense of safety — assaults in the Big Apple reached 28,000 for the first time on record last year  — and the perceptible shift toward volatile instability that many people feel is ramping up across all of American society, Humble and others say.

There's more at the link.

I suppose a panic room might be a defense against a psycopathic nitwit who can't add two and two together to get four.  Such an assailant might not be able to distinguish between his shoe size and his IQ.  However, for almost all other attackers, a panic room simply gives them an excuse to rob the homeowner blind while he/she/they cower in their illusory "safe place", unable to stop them.  What's more, check the police response times in your neighborhood.  It often takes cops ten to fifteen minutes or more to respond to most 911 calls.  During that time, while you're cowering in your safe room, what are the home invaders doing to you and/or your possessions?

It gets worse.  Panic rooms offer an attacker an opportunity to murder everyone in the building, because they make it almost impossible to escape.  If the attacker simply strikes a match or two and sets fire to the place, how are those in the panic room to get away from the flames?  Panic rooms pin down their occupants, fix them in place.  It's no good saying that they can have hidden exits to escape such a fate;  those exits have to come out somewhere, and if (as it almost always is) those exits are on the same property (much less in the same building), who's to say they won't have caught fire by the time those in the panic room want to use them?  And what if they use them, only to emerge surrounded by frustrated attackers who've been looking for them?

Tying yourself down to a supposedly secure location, but one where you're unable to defend yourself against attackers, is a disaster waiting to happen.  I'd much rather harden the exterior of my home, making it as difficult as possible for someone to break in, and then defend my family and property from inside.  Even more tactically suitable would be to prevent the attackers from approaching in the first place.  This is why one should select a home in as safe a neighborhood as possible (although in today's climate of highly mobile criminals, street riots and other crimes, that safety may be illusory).

One last point.  If you're in an apartment building or condo complex, you've made yourself hostage to the security-mindedness and safety-consciousness (or lack thereof) of everyone else living there.  Trapping yourself above ground level is always a security risk.  You don't need an attacker to strike a match:  a domestic accident can start a fire just as easily as a criminal.  How are you going to get out of your apartment and down to ground level?  Are there multiple exits, and paths to reach those exits?  Is the building constructed of relatively fireproof materials?  What businesses or attractive targets are in the building that might attract criminals to it?  Unless and until those questions are satisfactorily answered (and, if necessary, their answers have persuaded you to move to a safer location), a panic or safe room is a lot lower on the priority list.

I won't worry about a panic room.  After eighteen years living (and frequently fighting) in a war zone, I'd rather arm myself and inflict panic on my attackers!

Peter

The madness of bureaucratic edicts

 

I had to do a double-take when confronted with this report from Britain.

Ford could resort to limiting the sales of its petrol cars in the UK, as it struggles to meet the electric car sales targets laid down in the government’s Zero-Emissions Vehicle Mandate.

Introduced at the start of this year, the ZEV mandate requires manufacturers to ensure that a minimum percentage of their overall sales are battery-powered, or face fines of up to £15,000 for every ICE car sold over the limit. This year, the target is set at 22 per cent, however, while EV sales continue to grow due to fleet demand, private buyers are proving reluctant to make the transition and EV targets are looking hard to meet.

. . .

[Ford's] European boss of its ‘Model e’ electric car division, Martin Sander, told the Financial Times’ Future of the Car Summit: “We can’t push EVs into the market against demand. We’re not going to pay penalties. We are not going to sell EVs at huge losses just to buy compliance. The only alternative is to take our shipments of [engine-powered] vehicles to the UK down, and sell these vehicles somewhere else”.

Sander warned that the impact of such a move could mean inflated prices for traditional petrol and diesel cars if consumer demand for ICE engined vehicles can’t be met by potentially limited supply.

There's more at the link.

So a bureaucratic edict founded in "junk science" and hotly disputed by engineers and scientists will result in would-be motorists not being allowed to purchase the vehicles they want, but rather forced to buy alternatives that are less fit for purpose, a great deal more expensive (and polluting) to produce, and requiring extremely expensive battery replacement after a relatively short time in use.  Doesn't that demonstrate the brilliance and ingenuity of bureaucrats?  "If we can't change people's taste in cars, we'll simply force a third party (i.e. vehicle manufacturers) to deprive them of the opportunity to exercise that taste.  That'll show them!"

What's even nicer for them, said bureaucrats are unelected, not subject to public scrutiny in their work, and insulated against kickback from the electorate they're supposed to serve and protect.  This policy is like an automotive version of the famous "Yes, Minister" comedy clip.

Or, there's the old saw from the early days of the computer revolution (which I was taught as an entry-level programmer back in the 1970's):  "If builders built buildings the way programmers write programs, then the first woodpecker to come along would destroy civilization."  I daresay bureaucrats double the destruction factor!

Bureaucrats.  Parasites.  But then, I repeat myself . . .  Sadly, we have too many of them in America.  It's one area where Britain and the USA are proudly emulating one another in grinding their citizens' faces into the administrative mud.

Peter

I need information about solar panels, please

 

I hope some of my readers will be knowledgable enough to help with information about a small solar power installation.  I don't want a whole-house, major-league installation:  just enough to charge a couple of power stations in case of need, and perhaps an additional storage battery in due course.

I note that most of the solar power vendors want to charge several times the actual cost of the solar panels, which can be determined easily enough through looking at importers' prices.  I object strenuously to being "milked" like a cow for all the money they can get out of me!  In particular, many of them won't sell solar panels alone - only as part of an overall "solution" that's far more than I either want or can afford.

I'm looking for panels that can generate 500W-1,000W on a good, clear day, although I can go a bit higher if necessary.  I'd prefer to use 2-4 panels, but not more, for ease of portability.  They'll be mounted on a frame (fixed or on wheels) in my back yard, not on the roof.  They have to conform to these specifications:

• Total voltage:12-150V.
• Total power: 3000W max.
• Uses MC4 connectors or adapters.

If I need to reduce the power to charge smaller power stations, or to connect the panels to a power station for charging it, I'll also need the necessary equipment to do that.  They'll be used with Ecoflow and/or Bluetti power stations ranging from 500W to 5,000W in capacity.

If any reader can advise a reasonably good quality solar panel/s to fit that need, please let us know in Comments.  Please also advise on the type of frame that would be most suitable for the back yard, but would allow the panels to be brought under cover or otherwise protected when a Texas hailstorm arrives.  (Those are no fun:  right now, as I write these words, a team of roofers is stomping back and forth over my head, replacing our shingles as a result of a hailstorm last month.)

Also, if any reader can recommend a good introductory text, or video, or Web site to help me better understand the ins and outs of solar power, I'd be grateful.  Right now, I know only enough to be dangerous.  Thanks!

Peter