maybe it is a faulty study, but according to one analyst, real estate in India is way more expensive than anywhere in the US, in terms of relative cost for all real estate and in terms of absolute cost for a lot of it.
how does this strike you:
"Condos in New Delhi, India: 2-bedroom, 1000 sq. ft. apartment for $200,000. [$200 per sq ft] (Source: 99acres.com)
Condos in Chicago, USA: 2-bedroom, 1000 sq. ft. apartment for $400,000 [$400 per sq ft] (Source: Google Housing)
Now, remember that the median income in Chicago is 50 times more than that of New Delhi."
and
"Agricultural land in Faridabad, Haryana (adjacent to New Delhi much like New Jersey is to New York): $250,000 per acre (source: 99acres.com)
Agricultural land in New Jersey: $12,000 per acre (source: USDA (pdf file), and for comparison its $6,000 per acre in California and $8,000 per acre in Florida)"
real estate in most of the US is overvalued right now by about 25% according to Merril Lynch, but lets pretend it isn't. let's lie to ourselves and pretend that current incomes justify current prices here. let's also pretend that RE across the world follows the same rules. that the median residence should cost about 3-5X median household incomes, the way that they do in the US today. in India today, the median residence costs ($200k from above divided by $2700 GDP/capita from the CIA factbook) 75X median household income.
for reference, if houses cost 75X GDP/capita in the US, the median house would cost $3.3 Million.
sure, India is a rapidly growing economy, but does anyone really believe that they'll move from $2,700/yr incomes to $27,000/yr incomes in the next decade or so? it'd take at least that to begin to justify current real estate prices there.
another interesting factoid from the linked article: New Jersey is more densely populated than India.
i'd be willing to guess that China is in a similar ridiculous real estate speculation situation.
i have no idea how this can possibly be true. if anyone has evidence that it isn't true, i would greatly appreciate seeing it. this worldwide asset speculation worries me.
Friday, February 8, 2008
Peace in the Middle East (final confirmation)
the PM of Palestine has said he doesn't see a Peace accord with Israel in 2008.
this should come as no surprise, considering that the PM of Palestine has no ability to establish peace within Palestine. the Gaza strip is still controlled by Hamas, a terrorist organization that continues to shoot rockets into Israel on a daily basis.
don't get me wrong, the area isn't a flaming wreck. i'm sure life goes on as usual for most people, except that now Gaza is no longer getting electricity delivered to them by Israel. but, it is nowhere near a peace deal, no matter what any leader of the free world might say.
this is my second or third post since our president made a foolish claim about peace in Israel, so i think i'm done with the subject until another leader of the free world makes a silly claim that barely references reality.
this should come as no surprise, considering that the PM of Palestine has no ability to establish peace within Palestine. the Gaza strip is still controlled by Hamas, a terrorist organization that continues to shoot rockets into Israel on a daily basis.
don't get me wrong, the area isn't a flaming wreck. i'm sure life goes on as usual for most people, except that now Gaza is no longer getting electricity delivered to them by Israel. but, it is nowhere near a peace deal, no matter what any leader of the free world might say.
this is my second or third post since our president made a foolish claim about peace in Israel, so i think i'm done with the subject until another leader of the free world makes a silly claim that barely references reality.
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Ford Transit Connect
the Ford Transit Connect is coming to the states!
these things are ubiquitous in the rest of the motorized world, usually plastered with a company's logo and a layer of diesel exhaust condensate.
we won't get the diesel engine, though. or the manual transmission.
they'll mostly be bought as a smaller, more fuel efficient alternative to the Ford Econoline van for companies that make a lot of small deliveries in an urban setting. they carry up to five people or kind of a lot of stuff. a lot like the original scion xb, but far less cute, and a good bit more rugged.
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
infrared plants, bio-crude
two more exciting developments in the race to secure an energy future:
the genome of an unusual bacteria that can capture near infrared light has been sequenced. the hope is that we'll eventually be able transfer this ability to other plants, increasing their ability to capture light by around 5%, allowing them to capture more CO2 and convert it to useful products.
a new process to convert waste biomass into bio-crude has been developed in Australia. the idea is that it is inefficient to transport large amounts of waste to central processing locations, so they take the process to the waste, convert it to an energy-dense and easily transported bio-crude, then transport that to the next processor, who could convert it to anything from plastic bottles to biodiesel. this isn't the first process along these lines, but the developers claim that it is the best.
the genome of an unusual bacteria that can capture near infrared light has been sequenced. the hope is that we'll eventually be able transfer this ability to other plants, increasing their ability to capture light by around 5%, allowing them to capture more CO2 and convert it to useful products.
a new process to convert waste biomass into bio-crude has been developed in Australia. the idea is that it is inefficient to transport large amounts of waste to central processing locations, so they take the process to the waste, convert it to an energy-dense and easily transported bio-crude, then transport that to the next processor, who could convert it to anything from plastic bottles to biodiesel. this isn't the first process along these lines, but the developers claim that it is the best.
Monday, February 4, 2008
EVs in Israel
Israel has announced that they intend to heavily subsidize electric vehicles (EVs) by reducing the taxes on them and installing a charging infrastructure.
I like EVs in general, but you have to wonder what Israel's intention is here. It is a grossly polluting country that has only recently stopped selling leaded gasoline and using the most basic of emissions control equipment on their refineries. There is a lot of low hanging fruit on their pollution control tree. So, why reach up to the highest branches of expensive solutions with minimal gains like this EV project?
And it is not as if they have the huge sources of cheap electricity that would make EVs a good economic decision or a way to reduce oil imports. Quite the opposite, in fact. They frequently have brownouts during the hotter parts of the summer because of insufficient electric generation. And 82% of the electricity they do produce uses oil as a fuel (yes, electric cars powered by electricity produced from oil are more efficient than diesel cars powered by oil, but not by much, especially if Israel has to build even more generation infrastructure to serve the load).
So, it clearly isn't really an effort to reduce pollution, reduce oil imports, or save money. So, why is Israel aggressively encouraging EVs?
I can only imagine it is a public relations effort. Israel does a lot of high-tech science and engineering. They intend to have an economy that is increasingly high-tech. Intel and Microsoft both have their biggest international R&D offices there. But Israel still has a public image dictated by their international and domestic relations with Arabs. So, maybe this EV effort is an attempt to draw positive attention to the country.
Today, being the world leader in electric vehicle infrastructure is pretty inexpensive and maybe the positive international attention created by it is worthwhile.
I like EVs in general, but you have to wonder what Israel's intention is here. It is a grossly polluting country that has only recently stopped selling leaded gasoline and using the most basic of emissions control equipment on their refineries. There is a lot of low hanging fruit on their pollution control tree. So, why reach up to the highest branches of expensive solutions with minimal gains like this EV project?
And it is not as if they have the huge sources of cheap electricity that would make EVs a good economic decision or a way to reduce oil imports. Quite the opposite, in fact. They frequently have brownouts during the hotter parts of the summer because of insufficient electric generation. And 82% of the electricity they do produce uses oil as a fuel (yes, electric cars powered by electricity produced from oil are more efficient than diesel cars powered by oil, but not by much, especially if Israel has to build even more generation infrastructure to serve the load).
So, it clearly isn't really an effort to reduce pollution, reduce oil imports, or save money. So, why is Israel aggressively encouraging EVs?
I can only imagine it is a public relations effort. Israel does a lot of high-tech science and engineering. They intend to have an economy that is increasingly high-tech. Intel and Microsoft both have their biggest international R&D offices there. But Israel still has a public image dictated by their international and domestic relations with Arabs. So, maybe this EV effort is an attempt to draw positive attention to the country.
Today, being the world leader in electric vehicle infrastructure is pretty inexpensive and maybe the positive international attention created by it is worthwhile.
Friday, February 1, 2008
a silver lining?
if the more pessimistic/realistic economists are right about our financial institutions, the western world is in for a number of rocky years.
if the more pessimistic/realistic geologists are right about our oil supply, the industrialized world is in for a few tough decades.
so, what's the silver lining?
the renewable energy industry is poised to flourish. for the time being, this means wind power. and, depending on your definition of "renewable," nuclear power.
current solar technology is a farce at best, a politcal scandal at worst. same goes for tidal, wave, small-scale geothermal, high altitude wind, hybrid vehicles, and biofuels. some of them have interesting futures, but i have seen no good reason to pay any attention to them right now.
the conditions created by our financial system meltdown plus the belief that our oil production has peaked or will soon are excellent because of four factors:
1) low interest rates
2) low interest rates
3) low interest rates
4) politics
in a bit more detail:
1) low interest rates lead to a decrease in demand for USD, which leads to lower prices for USD, which means that each US dollar buys less than it used to. this causes the price of imported energy to rise, making energy from domestic sources more attractive
2) low interest rates make building wind and nuclear power facilities cheaper. as opposed to coal or natural gas plants, the vast majority of the cost of a wind or nuclear plant is up front. once the plant is built, the cost of fuel, operation, and maintenance is minimal. because of this, the lifetime cost of a wind or nuclear plant is strongly dependent on the interest rate
3) low interest rates cause people to expect inflation, so they look for ways to protect their wealth. traditionally, this meant buying gold (because it is the world's oldest currency). today, i think many people are buying oil futures instead of gold because they expect it to protect their wealth and also think that it may increase in value because of increasing demand from growing economies. this speculation accounts for around 30% of the price of oil today. Saudi Arabia sells oil for just over $60/barrel. by the time the markets are done with it, we end up paying over $90/barrel.
4) when the economy is bad, people generally want things to change. when it is an election year, this means whoever is presented by the other party will be elected. as it happens, the other party this year is the democrats. both democratic candidates have made strong statements about renewable energy mandates. Obama, the most likely democratic candidate (according to me) has said (according to cnn):
"Proposes reducing carbon emissions by 80 percent by 2050 by using a market-based cap-and-trade system. Would invest $150 billion over 10 years in clean energy. Supports next generation biofuels. Proposes increasing fuel economy standards and would require that 25 percent of electricity consumed in the U.S. is derived from clean, sustainable energy sources by 2025. Would create a Global Energy Forum and re-engage with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change"
all of this renewable energy development will be great for people in the energy and construction fields and will go ahead no matter what. in addition to the plants themselves, the transmission of this energy will require huge investments in the country's electrical infrastructure.
for me, this equates to a silver lining. i'm an electrical engineer, though, so i'd naturally see things this way.
update: apparently, some talking heads have come to much the same conclusion as me. so, if you've got cash burning a hole in your pocket, infrastructure may be the next bubble. electrical infrastructure is a good bet. GE is a major player, but too diversified to make big gains. Clipper Wind Power is my favorite turbine manufacturer for boring technical reasons, has room a lot of room to grow, and is traded in the UK.
if the more pessimistic/realistic geologists are right about our oil supply, the industrialized world is in for a few tough decades.
so, what's the silver lining?
the renewable energy industry is poised to flourish. for the time being, this means wind power. and, depending on your definition of "renewable," nuclear power.
current solar technology is a farce at best, a politcal scandal at worst. same goes for tidal, wave, small-scale geothermal, high altitude wind, hybrid vehicles, and biofuels. some of them have interesting futures, but i have seen no good reason to pay any attention to them right now.
the conditions created by our financial system meltdown plus the belief that our oil production has peaked or will soon are excellent because of four factors:
1) low interest rates
2) low interest rates
3) low interest rates
4) politics
in a bit more detail:
1) low interest rates lead to a decrease in demand for USD, which leads to lower prices for USD, which means that each US dollar buys less than it used to. this causes the price of imported energy to rise, making energy from domestic sources more attractive
2) low interest rates make building wind and nuclear power facilities cheaper. as opposed to coal or natural gas plants, the vast majority of the cost of a wind or nuclear plant is up front. once the plant is built, the cost of fuel, operation, and maintenance is minimal. because of this, the lifetime cost of a wind or nuclear plant is strongly dependent on the interest rate
3) low interest rates cause people to expect inflation, so they look for ways to protect their wealth. traditionally, this meant buying gold (because it is the world's oldest currency). today, i think many people are buying oil futures instead of gold because they expect it to protect their wealth and also think that it may increase in value because of increasing demand from growing economies. this speculation accounts for around 30% of the price of oil today. Saudi Arabia sells oil for just over $60/barrel. by the time the markets are done with it, we end up paying over $90/barrel.
4) when the economy is bad, people generally want things to change. when it is an election year, this means whoever is presented by the other party will be elected. as it happens, the other party this year is the democrats. both democratic candidates have made strong statements about renewable energy mandates. Obama, the most likely democratic candidate (according to me) has said (according to cnn):
"Proposes reducing carbon emissions by 80 percent by 2050 by using a market-based cap-and-trade system. Would invest $150 billion over 10 years in clean energy. Supports next generation biofuels. Proposes increasing fuel economy standards and would require that 25 percent of electricity consumed in the U.S. is derived from clean, sustainable energy sources by 2025. Would create a Global Energy Forum and re-engage with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change"
all of this renewable energy development will be great for people in the energy and construction fields and will go ahead no matter what. in addition to the plants themselves, the transmission of this energy will require huge investments in the country's electrical infrastructure.
for me, this equates to a silver lining. i'm an electrical engineer, though, so i'd naturally see things this way.
update: apparently, some talking heads have come to much the same conclusion as me. so, if you've got cash burning a hole in your pocket, infrastructure may be the next bubble. electrical infrastructure is a good bet. GE is a major player, but too diversified to make big gains. Clipper Wind Power is my favorite turbine manufacturer for boring technical reasons, has room a lot of room to grow, and is traded in the UK.
bionic ear, anyone?
new hearing replacement devices send signals directly to the brain.
the sound gets pretty distorted, but users apparently get used to it pretty quickly.
i'm kind of floundering for topics here. everyone is talking about the debt, recession, and credit problems now. 60 minutes even did a piece on it. they missed the wider impact, but i have only weakly supportable opinions on the wider impact.
peak oil and climate change are universally acknowledged.
i have opinions about who the next PUSA should be, but don't really want to talk about them.
the idea of peace in Israel anytime in the near future is so ridiculous that it doesn't even deserve to be mocked.
and there just isn't that much news in the areas of scientific development on a day to day basis.
so, this is me signing off until something new sparks my interest, i guess.
the sound gets pretty distorted, but users apparently get used to it pretty quickly.
i'm kind of floundering for topics here. everyone is talking about the debt, recession, and credit problems now. 60 minutes even did a piece on it. they missed the wider impact, but i have only weakly supportable opinions on the wider impact.
peak oil and climate change are universally acknowledged.
i have opinions about who the next PUSA should be, but don't really want to talk about them.
the idea of peace in Israel anytime in the near future is so ridiculous that it doesn't even deserve to be mocked.
and there just isn't that much news in the areas of scientific development on a day to day basis.
so, this is me signing off until something new sparks my interest, i guess.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)