First it was Amazon. Then Apple. Now, to nobody’s surprise, not only was the biggest privacy violator in history, Facebook, also listening in to everything you were dumb enough to say in its proximity, but it also was just as busy writing it all down.
According to Bloomberg, the company which has faced Congressional hearings for virtually every possible and impossible violation of user privacy (and gotten away with it with just a wristslap), Facebook was not only secretly collecting user audio without their knowledge or permission, but was paying “hundreds of outside contractors to transcribe clips of audio from users of its services.” Facebook – and Mark Zuckerberg – also appear to have forgotten to mention this minor detail during their countless sworn testimonies in Congress over the past year.
The work, as Bloomberg notes, “rattled the contract employees”, who are not told where the audio was recorded or how it was obtained — only to transcribe it, said the people, who requested anonymity for fear of losing their jobs.
They’re hearing Facebook users’ conversations, sometimes with vulgar content, but do not know why Facebook needs them transcribed, the people said.
Here’s a lucky guess “why” – because in its attempt to cozy with the government, and replace the NSA, Facebook ran out of in house spies and was forced to hire outside privacy violators in its quest to make a mockery of user privacy.
When approached by Bloomberg, Facebook confirmed that it had been transcribing users’ audio and said it will no longer do so, because somehow that will make it all better.
“We paused human review of audio more than a week ago,” the company said Tuesday. The company said the users who were affected chose the option in Facebook’s Messenger app to have their voice chats transcribed. The contractors were checking whether Facebook’s artificial intelligence correctly interpreted the messages, which were anonymized.
Of course, Facebook can just plead ignorance, and claim all other big tech companies – including Amazon and Apple – were doing the same. Indeed, all three tech giants have recently come under fire for collecting audio snippets from consumer computing devices and subjecting those clips to human review.
Bloomberg first reported in April that Amazon had a team of thousands of workers around the world listening to Alexa audio requests with the goal of improving the software, and that similar human review was used for Apple’s Siri and Alphabet Inc.’s Google Assistant. Apple and Google have since said they no longer engage in the practice and Amazon said it will let users opt out of human review.
Now it’s Facebook’s turn to say it, too, paused the practice following scrutiny of other technology companies’ audio-collection programs.
Which is odd, because the social networking giant which claims it has over 2 billion monthly active users, just completed a $5 billion settlement with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission after a probe of its privacy practices; it has long denied that it collects audio from users to inform ads or help determine what people see in their news feeds. Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg denied the idea directly in Congressional testimony.
“You’re talking about this conspiracy theory that gets passed around that we listen to what’s going on on your microphone and use that for ads,” Zuckerberg told U.S. Senator Gary Peters in April 2018. “We don’t do that.”
Apparently “we” did.
In follow-up answers for Congress, the company said it “only accesses users’ microphone if the user has given our app permission and if they are actively using a specific feature that requires audio (like voice messaging features.)” The Menlo Park, California-based company did not address what happens to the audio afterward. Now we know: it was all dutifully transcribed and collected.
Some more lies: the Facebook data-use policy, revised last year to make it “more understandable” for the public, includes no mention of audio according to Bloomberg. It does, however, say Facebook will collect “content, communications and other information you provide” when users “message or communicate with others.”
Facebook says its “systems automatically process content and communications you and others provide to analyze context and what’s in them.” It includes no mention of other human beings screening the content. In a list of “types of third parties we share information with,” Facebook doesn’t mention a transcription team, but vaguely refers to “vendors and service providers who support our business” by “analyzing how our products are used.”
Worse, Facebook never disclosed to users that third parties may review their audio. That’s led some contractors to feel their work is unethical, according to the people with knowledge of the matter.
Unethical yes, but criminal? Well, that’s up to Congress to decide. And judging by the non-existent reaction in the stock price following the Bloomberg news…
… nobody will be losing much sleep over yet another flagrant violation of personal privacy by the company which hopes to soon control not only all global media, but also money, thanks to its Libra initiative.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2MdR2zG Tyler Durden
Yesterday, in the immediate aftermath of the historic collapse of all Argentine assets, coupled with the record plunge in the Argentine Peso which only added to the USD-denominated pain of those who were unlucky enough to be long Argentina stocks and bonds, we asked if Michael Hasenstab – the man who may have bought every single sovereign bond dip in history in hopes of being bailed out by central banks – was on Epsteinwatch, for the simple reason that this time a bailout was not forthcoming, resulting in unprecedented losses.
As a reminder, back in May 2018, when it was on the verge of the biggest ever IMF bailout in history (some $57 billion and counting in money that will never be recovered), Argentina received a “vote of confidence” from Franklin Templeton’s Michael Hasenstab after he injected $2.25 billion into the country, which has been battling to save its currency. As the Financial Times reported then, funds run by Hasenstab, including his flagship $38 billion Templeton Global Bond fund, snapped up more than three quarters of a 73 billion peso ($3 billion) ‘Bote’ bond issuance by Argentina in May 2018. .
The purchase reportedly made the asset manager Argentina’s single largest creditors, with holdings in most Argentina bond securities, including the country’s infamous 100 year bond due 2117, which has been eviscerated in the past two days as it now appears the country’s market-friendly regime is on its way out, and will be replaced with the second coming of Cristina Kirchner.
Following the $3 billion issuance, Luis Caputo, Argentina’s finance minister and former central bank president, told Bloomberg: “You can’t get a bigger sign of confidence from markets when you place a bond in pesos at a fixed-rate on one of the worst days in emerging markets this year. It is a sign of confidence in president Macri, and the policies he is putting in place.”
A little over one year later, that “sign of confidence” has come back to haunt both Hasenstab and Templeton, because as we first suggested yesterday…
…. today Bloomberg confirms that the record crash in Argentine assets is “wreaking “havoc on some of the largest U.S. money managers, but none more so than Hasenstab’s employer, the $720 billion mutual fund, Franklin Templeton. According to Bloomberg calculations, the biggest loser was the $11.3 billion Templeton Emerging Markets Bond Fund, which fell by 3.5%, a drop that has continued on Tuesday as the selling was nowhere near done. That was its largest daily drop since the October 2008 global financial crisis.
What is perhaps surprising is that the fund’s loss wasn’t even bigger: The Templeton fund had a 12% allocation to Argentina as of June 30, including Treasury bonds and notes linked to the nation’s benchmark rate. As discussed yesterday, Argentine stocks (denominated in USD) lost more than half their value in one day – an unprecedented event – while sovereign and corporate bonds erased $16.8 billion of their value in the Bloomberg Barclays emerging-market index on Monday.
The plunge “shows the painful and long-lasting impact of Argentina’s belligerent treatment of creditors,” said Mike Conelius, a money manager at T. Rowe Price , whose $5.8 billion emerging-market bond fund slumped by 2.2% on Monday, the most in six years. Over 7% of the T. Rowe portfolio was exposed to the country.
To be sure, Templeton wasn’t the only one hammered this week by Argentina’s spectacular implosion: other large funds also suffered, such as the $7.5 billion Ashmore Emerging Markets Short Duration Fund which fell by 3.2%, while the $1.4 billion Fidelity Series Emerging Markets Debt Fund dropped by 3.1%.
Meanwhile, we wonder if for Hasenstab who may have lost more money in one day than he made over the past decade with all his prior, haphazard bets on central bank bailouts, will finally face the proverbial “swimming naked when the tide runs out” moment, or if investors are dumb enough to keep giving him more money.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2YJdCqw Tyler Durden
Submitted by Steve Englander, Head, Global G10 FX Research and North America Macro Strategy at Standard Chartered Bank
Currency wars are likely to be won by the countries that can afford the consequences
DM economies are likely to have an advantage over EM
In DM, inflation rates are lower, bond issuance is domestic, and bond yields are less likely to back up
If both the Fed and Treasury want to weaken the USD, we think they are likely to succeed …
… except if the consequent risk-off response generates buying of USD along with other safe havens
Riding the horse is easy, affording the stable is hard
Most analysis of currency wars begins and ends with the view that the country that depreciates the most wins. We argue here that the likely winner is the country that can best handle the consequences of depreciation. A wealthy economy with a current account deficit, low inflation, a flat Phillips curve, room to cut policy rates, long-term rates that track policy rates down, and local currency-denominated debt is at an advantage in winning a currency war, in our view. Keeping in mind that ‘victory’ in a currency war is a sustained weaker currency, our conclusions are:
Developed-market (DM) economies in general have an advantage over emerging-market (EM) economies in dealing with the consequences of currency weakness
The US would likely have an advantage over other DM economies if it aggressively pursued currency depreciation, but not under all circumstances
The USD, JPY, CHF and possibly EUR are safe-haven currencies; a currency war that led to risk selling would likely cause them to strengthen
Currency weakness is often associated with poor outcomes in EM, making it harder for EM policy makers to commit fully to aggressive easing
EM currencies tend to fall in a strongly risk-off environment, but this is hardly a currency war victory because EM asset markets and economies are damaged
Domestic markets are more forgiving when DM currencies depreciate
DM investors tolerate easing better than EM
We define winning a currency war as successfully weakening one’s currency to induce a pick-up in net exports, without significant negative inflation or domestic asset-market consequences. Developed economies have an advantage because their bond markets generally respond favourably to monetary easing, even when the currency weakens.
In EM countries, easing at the short end does not always translate into lower long-term yields (Figure 1). EM rates do not always back up on easing, but this risk creates a headwind to aggressive easing. Winning a currency war that pushes inflation to unacceptable levels, drives up long-term rates, damages business confidence, disturbs financial markets and financial institutions, or leads to undesired capital outflows is a pyrrhic victory.
DM economies do not face the issues of long-term credibility that many EM economies face. Long-term DM yields rarely go in the opposite direction to short-term yields in response to policy moves, even when the currency drops. EM countries face the risk that policy easing and currency weakness will backfire if long-term yields rise. On 7 August, New Zealand and India cut policy rates more than expected; New Zealand’s 10Y yields fell and India’s 10Y yields rose.
We think this phenomenon makes it more difficult for EM countries to maintain weak currencies than for DM countries. As a result, we think that currency wars are broadly a long EM, short DM currency trade unless risk sells off sharply. Like polo, the issue is not whether you can ride the horse, but whether you can afford the upkeep.
Below-target inflation makes it easier to deal with currency weakness
The credibility of currency wars is enhanced if inflation is below target, so that the weaker exchange rate helps inflation move closer to the target rather than away from it. In the G20, no DM country currently has inflation above 2.25% y/y. In EM, Asia has the biggest concentration of low-inflation EM economies (Figure 2), with Taiwan, Singapore, South Korea, Thailand and Malaysia below 2.25% and the Philippines,
China, India, Hong Kong, Indonesia and Vietnam above 2.25%. Few economies face major inflation constraints at present, but encouraging depreciation is less risky when inflation is approaching the target from below and is unlikely to significantly breach it.
Food and energy are relatively small percentages of the DM consumption basket. Rising prices of commodities that are largely priced in global markets do not create social tensions because the impact on living standards is relatively modest. In the US, food and energy make up 11% of the consumption basket and have about a 20% weight in the CPI.
Countries where prices of essentials are closely tied to the exchange rate and where these essentials are a large share of consumption are more vulnerable to depreciation. If domestic food and energy prices are largely driven by world markets, driving the exchange rate down sharply deals a major blow to living standards. In Brazil, food and energy together represent 30% of the CPI. In Vietnam, food and beverages alone are almost 40% of the CPI.
Borrowing abroad makes currency depreciation risky
We think it is less risky to engage in a currency war if domestic debt is almost entirely in local currency. The boost to trade competitiveness from currency depreciation quickly turns sour if depreciation leads to corporate or sovereign debt repayment problems or financial-sector stress. Few DM economies issue in foreign currencies, while many EM economies do. This may limit some EM countries to currency skirmishes, where they try to prevent appreciation or encourage modest depreciation rather than engaging in all-out war to weaken their currencies.
In principle, countries with current account deficits should have an easier time weakening their currencies, particularly if intervention is unsterilised. The logic is that if a country already has a current account deficit and is trying to reduce or eliminate the capital account surplus, it will be hard for the currency to move anywhere but down.
A current account deficit is often accompanied by high interest rates that may make capital flows sticky. However, the combination of a deficit and low rates could be a powerful factor driving both the current and capital accounts into deficit – provided that other factors, such as safe-haven flows, are neutral. The drop in the exchange rate is the mechanism by which the current account-capital account identity is maintained. Along the same lines, if potential capital outflows are hampered by regulation, liberalisation of the capital account would quickly depreciate the currency, but could also have spillover effects on domestic assets.
Safe-haven status is a similar consideration. If the currency war is taking place during, or contributing to, a risk-off episode, safe-haven currencies may find that intervention has limited success in deterring or offsetting capital inflows. The US might find it easier to weaken the USD if investor sentiment were more robust and there was less safe-haven buying of US Treasuries. Again, while easing rates and providing ample liquidity – essentially unsterilised intervention – could mitigate the risk-negative consequences, this is not certain against a backdrop of trade tensions.
Do you want to be a central bank or an asset manager?
Some reserve managers oversee large FX reserve portfolios (Figure 4). The Swiss National Bank’s (SNB’s) interventions have made it one of the world’s biggest asset managers, with reserves approaching 110% of GDP. If the reserve portfolio is more than 40% of GDP, a 10% capital gain or loss on the portfolio due to currency shifts can represent a big percentage of annual growth. Moreover, after intervention, reserve managers are stuck with a portfolio of foreign currencies that no private portfolio manager would have selected (see US can intervene, but what would it buy?). When the reserve portfolio increases in size, so does the potential for conflict between the portfolio management and monetary policy management roles.
Is it worth winning a currency war?
In the best of circumstances, a weaker currency enables a country’s producers to sell more to the rest of the world, at the cost of the country’s consumers being able to afford a smaller consumption basket. If a currency drops 10%, the country’s producers will likely gain market share, but its consumers will have lower purchasing power abroad. The narrow case for currency weakness is that it may generate employment for workers who would otherwise be unemployed.
In the US, two-year growth in employment of manufacturing production workers has not exceeded 2.25% since 1985, well before trade with China was an issue (Figure 3). Increasing that growth rate to 3.25% over an extended period would require generating an additional 90,000 production worker jobs a year beyond the peak of the last the 35 years. This is only 7,500 workers per month more on a non-farm payroll basis than otherwise, about one-sixth the standard error of m/m employment growth.
US may have a small currency-war advantage within G10
The US has lots of room to ease compared to others
We think DM policy makers could succeed in broadly weakening their currencies against EM currencies. Within G10, we believe the US has significant advantages, although they are not absolute. The US has low inflation and can force short- and long-end rates down further than other G10 economies without hitting zero-bound constraints; however, Barkis (the Fed) must be willing (see The why and how of a potential Fed FX intervention). The FX intervention literature emphasises that intervention signals central bank objectives. Not participating in Treasury intervention would be a negative signal to markets and other central banks, unless there were a simultaneous easing of policy rates and increase in liquidity.
A risk-off currency war weakens small G10 and EM
The US’ problem is that the USD is in the top tier of safe havens: not quite the JPY and CHF, but ahead of other G10 and EM currencies. So a currency war that raises risk-off tensions would limit broad USD weakness. The USD’s liquidity and reserve status may also make foreigners more willing to hold it, even at lower rates.
Negative-rate currencies may depreciate faster on easing
The European Central Bank (ECB) and the Bank of Japan (BoJ) already have rates in negative territory and may find it harder to cut rates significantly. Sterilised intervention would mean selling the EUR or JPY for foreign currency and selling an equivalent amount of domestic assets to offset the liquidity injection from the intervention. The outcome would be a shift in the composition of the BoJ or ECB monetary base to holding more foreign assets and fewer domestic assets. Sterilised intervention could be surprisingly effective, as foreign investors may be reluctant to hold more negative-yielding EUR or JPY assets without a hefty discount.
Unsterilised intervention would entail flooding the FX market with newly printed money to buy foreign currencies. The ECB or BoJ balance sheet would have more foreign assets, foreigners would have fewer domestic assets and more EUR or JPY assets, and the overall supply of EUR or JPY in asset markets would be higher. Such an intervention may work very well to weaken the EUR or JPY, but poorly in terms of the impact on domestic financial markets and the financial system if it makes rates more negative. Fiscal stimulus makes more sense, but there are institutional and policy barriers to this in both countries.
Japanese equity markets are typically very responsive to up-and-down moves in the trade-weighted JPY (Figure 5). This is another way currency weakness could have positive effects for Japan. Euro-area, US, Swiss and Norwegian equity markets also generally respond positively, but the US and euro-area equity-market response is somewhat more variable. We think most of the equity impact would be via valuation effects on corporate profits rather than higher export volumes. Commodity-currency equity prices show less consistent effects from currency depreciation – possibly because their exchange rates and equity prices often respond to common commodity-price shocks. We suspect that the EM equity price response resembles that of DM commodity currencies more than G3 currencies.
The ECB is unlikely to initiate a currency war due to the risk of US retaliation and the soft EUR. USD-JPY is already under downward pressure as a consequence of low US rates and broad risk-off sentiment. Under G20 rules, it would be hard for the BoJ to justify intervening on the basis of rate differentials narrowing and supporting the JPY. There is a reasonable case that central banks of safe-haven currencies should intervene counter-cyclically, but this would likely provoke heavy US criticism and possibly countermeasures. Most likely, the Japanese authorities would stop short of intervention but intervene verbally as long as USD-JPY were falling gradually. A sharp drop towards and past the 100 level for USD-JPY could prompt limited intervention aimed at smoothing, but this could fail if investors see US opposition limiting Japan’s ability to respond.
The Bank of England (BoE) and Bank of Canada (BoC) are not far off their inflation targets – they could act resolutely in pushing rates down, but may have to deal with inflation consequences down the road. Fiscal stimulus, accompanied by central bank balance-sheet expansion, makes more sense than targeting the currency. With Swiss reserves having risen to almost 110% of GDP in Q1-2019 from less than 10% in 2008, it is unclear how much more appetite for intervention the SNB has.
Of the remaining G10 countries, Norway and Sweden have already-weak currencies, plenty of fiscal room, and inflation close to target. Australia and New Zealand have been encouraging their currencies weaker for some time, but also have plenty of fiscal room.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2Z1XADI Tyler Durden
“Financial technology firms” and clueless left wing lawmakers are now attempting to change the infrastructure behind payday so that workers get paid “faster”, according to the Wall Street Journal.
There is a group of technology start ups with more than $300 million in venture funding that have worked on ways to “front workers’ wages” – (also known as a payday loan?) – and then collect later when payday arrives. They are experimenting with using certain types of fees or selling companies’ future payroll obligations to investors. Some start up companies are also advertising faster paycheck access.
And these new payday loanssuper technologically savvy inventions are, of course, being back by Senator Elizabeth Warren and Representative Ayanna Pressley, among other Democrats. They’re looking to push change that will get workers paid a day or two faster, which they claim could make a “big difference”.
In other words: they want to get a broke consumer their money faster, so they can spend it and stay broke quicker.
Aaron Klein, a fellow at the Brookings Institution, noted that there’s a program at Wells Fargo that waives overdraft fees for people who receive a direct deposit the day after spending more than they have. Under this program, more than 2 million customers have already avoided fees in 2018.
Klein believes that slow payments can “cost workers billions of dollars a year in overdraft fees”. We’re wondering if he has ever thought of the simple idea of people just not spending money they don’t have.
Meanwhile, $30 billion is lent out every year in payday loans and functions that once took days or weeks to manage involving payroll can now sometimes take minutes using software.
And even though direct deposit has become the new norm, payday could supposedly still be faster. Senator Elizabeth Warren has taken exception with the fact that paychecks sometimes “take a day or two to clear”. She’s been advocating for the Federal Reserve to build a new payment network that can move money instantly. Because of course, what we need is the Federal Reserve handling our paychecks and getting involved.
But it looks like that’s what’s going to happen.
The Federal Reserve said earlier this month that it plans to build this type of network over the next few years to compete with other real time systems offered by banks. Other banks that have built their own instant payment systems have lobbied against it.
Today, the norm is for companies to put their payroll through a couple of days early to accommodate the delay in clearing for their employees. And so, with instant payments, companies might just hold onto employees’ money a day or two longer.
ADP held an average of $24.3 billion of money in transit from companies but not yet paid to employees in the fiscal year ending June 2018. That generated $466.5 million in interest revenue for them. The company is now starting to work with clients that want faster options for pay and is discussing it with lawmakers and regulators.
For example, right now ADP works with a start up company called DailyPay, Inc. which competes to offer instant pay access to employees. ADP is also working on starting a program that will enable workers who are viewing their pay online to explore new ways of getting access to their money. But of course, just like with any service, there’s costs associated with it. ADP might earn less interest for holding cash and more fees for faster service, but the shift is still in its early days.
Some experts view these programs as intermediate steps, with the ultimate shift being companies just paying workers more frequently. Now, gig economy workers, like those for Uber, can get paid up to five times a day by getting the money out put on debit cards – but few other workers have that option.
About 60% of US private businesses pay employees every two weeks and another 5% pay monthly.
Todd Baker, a senior fellow at Columbia University’s Richman Center for Business, Law and Public Policy said:
“You’ve got an enormous embedded infrastructure of payroll tied into doing things, and the cost of replacing it is pretty significant.”
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/33t87Ln Tyler Durden
You know, the woman Jeffrey Epstein referred to as his “best friend” and who’s accused of acting as his madam in this whole sordid affair. She seems to have disappeared off the face of the earth and very few people seem interested.
As Vanity Fair’s Vanessa Grigoriadis notes, is it possible prosecutors have lost track of Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged co-conspirator in his pedophile ring?
For the past few weeks, rumors have circulated that she’s 400 pounds and living in Florida, or that she’s living the high life in London or the Continent, but according to the Washington Post, authorities are having a hard time locating her.
Those who know her say that it’s possible she is as much of a Houdini as Epstein. Both of them liked having secrets, and the way those secrets kept people off balance. “Jeffrey always wanted to give the impression that he was an international man of mystery—‘I control everyone and everything, I collect people, I own people, I can damage people,’” says an ex-girlfriend.
…
A source close to Maxwell says she spoke glibly and confidently about getting girls to sexually service Epstein, saying this was simply what he wanted, and describing the way she’d drive around to spas and trailer parks in Florida to recruit them. She would claim she had a phone job for them, “and you’ll make lots of money, meet everyone, and I’ll change your life.” The source continues, “Ghislaine was in love with Jeffrey the way she was in love with her father. She always thought if she just did one more thing for him, to please him, he would marry her.”
Maxwell had one other thing to tell this woman: “When I asked what she thought of the underage girls, she looked at me and said, ‘they’re nothing, these girls. They are trash.’”
This is why Liberty Blitzkrieg’s Mike Krieger rages that the top question right now should be – Where is Ghislaine Maxwell (and why isn’t she in custody)?
London — The death of Jeffrey Epstein is putting new attention on his alleged co-conspirators, who could still face charges. The number one person on that list is Ghislaine Maxwell, who’s accused of finding teenage girls for Epstein and his friends — including a member of Britain’s royal family.
As CBS News correspondent Holly Williams reports, documents unsealed on Friday contain allegations that Maxwell, a close acquaintance of Epstein’s, played an “important role” in the late billionaire financier’s “sexual abuse ring,”directing an underage girl to have sex with Epstein and others. Maxwell strenuously denies the allegations. Her current whereabouts are unknown.
Strange, sure, but it gets even more bizarre once you understand who her late father, Robert Maxwell, was. There’s even a book written about him.
No, not strange at all. Totally normal, nothing to see here.
Rule of law in America? Don’t be ridiculous. There are rulers and the ruled. Which bucket do you think you’re in?
* * *
Liberty Blitzkrieg is now 100% ad free. To make this a successful, sustainable thing consider the following options. You can become a Patron. You can visit the Support Page to donate via PayPal, Bitcoin or send cash/check in the mail.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2McZEGR Tyler Durden
Power demand in Texas hit a record high on Monday as consumers turned up their air conditioners to escape a heatwave that is boiling much of the southern Plains over the next 7-10 days.
“A large ridge of high pressure has anchored itself across the southern Plains over the last 7-10 days, promoting significant heat across Texas. As of Tuesday morning, Dallas has reached 100°F each of the last 4 days, while Houston’s Intercontinental Airport has hit 101°F each of the past 5 days. Generally speaking, warmer than normal temperatures will continue for the foreseeable future across Texas,” said Meteorologist and owner of Empire Weather LLC., Ed Vallee.
According to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), who operates the electric grid and supplies energy to more than 25 million customers, representing 90% of the state’s electrical load, reported that demand surged to 74,531 megawatts (MW) at 5 p.m. CDT on Monday and could reach 75,000 MW on Tuesday. Reuters notes that the all-time high was 73,473 MW on July 19, 2018.
ERCOT has 78,000 MW of generating capacity. As demand continues to reach critical levels, the grid operator could issue warnings to customers advising them to reduce energy.
ERCOT Houston MW-hour jumped from $25 to $603 on August 12, a +2,237% move in 1,440 minutes.
“This is blowing up, David Hoy, a trader at Dynasty Power, told Bloomberg, “That should be the highest price of the year so far.”
Meteorologist Vallee said air temperature and humidity across the region could make temperatures feel closer to 110 through the week.
In comparison to other grid operators across the country, ERCOT Houston is experiencing the most significant spikes in energy costs this week.
The jump in energy costs shows just how unpredictable the Texas power market has become as coal-fired generators are retired for cheaper natural gas and renewable energy sources.
ERCOT said its reserve margin, which is the spread between total generation available and forecast peak demand, with the difference shown as a percentage of peak demand, is at an all-time low of 7.4% because several coal-fired power plants have been retired as of recent.
Monday’s price spike also shows how renewable energy, which makes up about 25% of Texas’ energy generation, had difficulty generating enough power to handle the demand surge.
Grid data from Bloomberg showed wind power generation in the region slid by 50% Monday, with most of the energy generation coming from fossil fuel power stations.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/33ylZ7l Tyler Durden
I compare the UN World Population Prospects 2019 report (split by the World Bank Gross National Income data) vs. the EIA International Energy Outlook 2017.
I show the observed data sets from 1980 through 2018 and projected data sets from 2019 through 2050.
Imminent declines in the wealthier nations consumer populations are sure to mean significantly larger decelerations in Energy Consumption than presently forecast.
The ongoing but decelerating Poorer Nations population growth will not make up the difference.
A large, and likely non-linear, deceleration in global energy consumption appears likely.
Food for thought. Utilizing data sets, rather than anecdotal evidence, can be helpful when attempting to understand the present and future realities we should anticipate.
Today, I compare the 2019 UN Population Prospects report vs. the EIA (US Energy Information Administration) International Energy Outlook 2017.
I split the world’s 0-65 year-olds into roughly even populations by those nations with $4k (thousand) and above per capita purchasing power (solid blue line below) vs. those nations with per capita purchasing power below $4k (solid red line below).
I compare total energy consumption, split by the same wealthier nations (dashed blue line) versus poorer nations (dashed red line).
The “above $4k” nations have an average purchasing power of over $16k per capita income while those nations “below $4k” average $1.6k. This is about a 10 fold discrepancy in purchasing and consuming power of the wealthier vs. the poorer citizens of the world for what are essentially globally consistently priced commodities and exports.
The wealthier nations consume just over 88% of the worlds energy and the poor nations the remaining 12%.
The data from 1980 through 2018 are actual observations while the data from 2019 through 2050 are projections.
In order to see better understand what is taking place, the chart below shows population change of the two groups on an annual change basis. As the chart details, population change of the wealthier nations 0-65yr/old population (blue columns) has decelerated from +38 million annually in 1988 to just +5 million annually in 2019, and is set to cease growing as of 2023. By 2035, this wealthier population is projected to be declining by about -15 million annually (this is assuming ongoing high rates of immigration, absent this, the declines will be larger). Meanwhile, 0-65 year-old population growth among the poorer nations gently accelerated from ’88 through ’18 (+47 million to +53 million annually) but growth is now projected to continue a consistent deceleration to +35 million by 2050. Fascinatingly, these changes in annual population growth are not expected to have significant impact on the trend growth of energy consumption (wealthier nations energy consumption=blue dashed line vs. poorer nations energy consumption=red dashed line).
Finally, detailing annual change in population and annual change in energy consumption. As above, the annual population change of wealthier nations, (blue columns) versus poorer nations (red columns) but detailing the annual change in energy consumption of wealthier nations (blue line) versus annual change in energy consumption of poorer nations (red line).
Given the high volatility of the changing energy consumption vs. the relatively smooth population changes in the chart above, the last two charts average out the differing wealthier and poorer nations annual change in population and like annual change in energy consumption from 1980 through 2018 and 2019 through 2050.
First, Wealthier Nations…
From 1980 through 2018, wealthier nations saw an average annual increase of 24 million 0-65 year-olds versus an annual energy consumption increase of 6.9 quadrillion BTU’s.
From 2019 through 2050, wealthier nations are projected to see an average annual decline of -8 million 0-65 year-olds versus an annual increase in energy consumption by 4.8 quadrillion BTU.
And Poorer Nations…
From 1980 through 2018, poorer nations saw an average increase of 49 million 0-65 year-olds annually versus an annual energy consumption increase of 1.4 quadrillion BTU’s.
From 2019 through 2050, poorer nations are projected to see an average annual increase of 46 million 0-65 year-olds versus an annual increase of energy consumption of 1.9 quadrillion BTU’s.
From 2019 through 2050, the consumer of 88% of earths energy, the wealthier nations, are expected to increase their total energy consumption by 154 quadrillion BTU’s (+29%) versus a 62 quadrillion BTU increase among the poor nations (+87%). This is based on an assumption of a 39% wealthy energy consumption increase on a per capita basis…versus a 33% increase on a per capita basis among the poor nations of the world.
The 2019 through 2050 wealthy energy consumption is a very strange projection that wealthier nations will significantly increase their total energy consumption against shrinking workforces, decelerating need for more infrastructure, more factories, more supply chains, etc.. Further, this is strange given continued innovation and conservation efforts in the creation and utilization of energy from all sources.
My two cents…
…is the UN medium variant population data is overstating population growth (and understating population declines among the wealthy nations) and that the EIA International Energy Outlook is somewhere from mildly to wildly overstating energy consumption growth. With a soon to be shrinking working age consumer base among the wealthier nations who do nearly 90% of the global consuming, the already existing oversupply of capacity will only grow larger. This lack of demand growth will block the poorer nations from developing and producing further supply. This lack of global demand will mean little to no export based growth among the poorer nations (no repeat of the “Asian tigers” or anticipated “S-curves” for India or Africa). As these two data sets are trued up to reality (and one another), the implications for the present and future will be a very different world than is currently being projected.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2TtV7Au Tyler Durden
Just under 40 minutes before ABC News reporter Aaron Katersky tweeted the first media announcement of Jeffrey Epstein’s death, someone posted about it on 4chan – saying “[D]ont ask me how I know, but Epstein died an hour ago from hanging, cardiac arrest. Screencap this,” reports BuzzFeed.
Later in the thread, the anonymous user posted: “Was called out as a cardiac arrest at the manhattan federal detention facility. Worked asystole for 40 mins”
As other 4chan users cast doubt, the user said: “worked asystole arrest for 40 minutes, als intubated in the field/epi/2 liters NS infused. Telemetry advised bicarb and D50 in field. Pt transported to Lower Manhattan ER and worked for 20 minutes and called. Hospital administrator was alerted, preparing statements.”
“Telemetry implies the paramedics were in contact with a medical control hospital who then gave orders to give Sodium Bicarbonate, bicarb which is designed to reverse the acid buildup in the blood from prolonged cardiac arrest,” according to Dr. Keith Wesley, author fof several EMS textbooks and articles.
According to the FDNY’s Frank Dwyer, the fire department says it’s reviewing the incident, but there is no investigation.
Oren Barzilay, the president of the union for EMT workers Local 2507 in New York, said, “our members do not release this type of confidential information, this looks like a 3rd party info.” Barzilay also told BuzzFeed News the union would investigate the potential breach of confidentiality “if such a claim came forward.”
“There’s serious consequences for those violations. Discipline. Suspensions. Civil penalties, etc,” Barzilay said in an email. –BuzzFeed
In short, a 4chan user with inside medical information scooped the media.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2YZj9EU Tyler Durden
Chinese state media outlet Global Times has reported one of its journalists had been seized and bound in an ‘arrest’ by anti-Beijing Hong Kong protesters which had occupied the city’s international airport.
Global Times’ editor-in-chief Hu Xijin made an appeal on social media Tuesday for the protesters to release the reporter, saying he was only there to cover the demonstrations and must not be harmed. He also called on western journalists to intervene in the situation.
Screengrap of Fu Guohao being bound and paraded by anti-Beijing HK protesters.
Hu Xijin confirmed the identity of the man seen in the video being bound with multiple zip ties with his arms placed above his head.
The protesters surrounded the mainland-based reporter as if a high value detainee, accusing him of wrongdoing.
Fu Guohao, reporter of GT website is being seized by demonstrators at HK airport. I affirm this man being tied in this video is the reporter himself. He has no other task except for reporting. I sincerely ask the demonstrators to release him. I also ask for help of West reporters pic.twitter.com/sbFb0L3s92
The Hong Kong airport has been reportedly completely retaken by police less than an hour after reports of riot police storming the airport first hit the Internet. Few injuries have been reported – but many have been arrested. The Guardian reports that the police arrested more than 20 protesters.
The major Chinese daily editor wrote:
Fu Guohao, reporter of GT website is being seized by demonstrators at HK airport. I affirm this man being tied in this video is the reporter himself. He has no other task except for reporting. I sincerely ask the demonstrators to release him. I also ask for help of West reporters.
CNN described the circumstances of the journalist’s detention as follows:
Hong Kong TV channel iCable, a CNN affiliate, reported that the man was wearing a yellow high visibility vest and that protesters were demanding to see his press ID, while shouting “gangster” at him.
According to local reports, protesters pinned him to the ground, seized his belongings and draped an “I love HK Police” T-shirt over him, as others tried to step in and stop the violence.
Though this man was eventually evacuated and treated by paramedics, Global Times insisted the man was simply reporting on the riots when he was captured and brutalized.
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2Tr66L2 Tyler Durden
It’s been just over a year since Elon Musk’s infamous ‘funding secured’ tweet, and everybody who followed the New York Times’ relentless coverage of the scandal – the paper helped expose the fact that Musk effectively lied to the public and violated a bevy of SEC rules – will remember that legendary NYT business columnist Jim Stewart not only led the paper’s coverage, but also scored an interview with Musk where the CEO shared how stressed out and depressed he had become over the company’s production difficulties with the Model 3.
But, as it turns out, during the course of his research, Stewart, who, in addition to his role at the NYT, is a regular contributor of CNBC, was invited by Jeffrey Epstein to visit his Manhattan townhouse for an ‘on background’ interview.
The meeting with Epstein happened a few months before the Miami Herald published its series of exposes that led to the latest round of charges against Epstein.
Epstein’s townhouse
In a story published in the NYT on Tuesday, Stewart recounted the details of their meeting (it was supposed to be on background, but since Epstein is now deceased, Stewart believes he can now violate that agreement).
Most surprisingly, Stewart described Epstein’s affect as almost incredulously carefree. While Stewart wasn’t able to glean much information about Musk or Tesla from Epstein (perhaps because, he discerned, Epstein actually knew far less than he was letting on), he listened as Epstein showed off photographs with famous friends (including MbS and…you guessed it…Bill Clinton) and held forth about a range of stunning a lascivious subjects.
Here’s a rundown of some of Epstein’s most suspicious comments.
Epstein openly professed his love of underage women, and even implied that sex between older men and teenage girls should be legal.
If he was reticent about Tesla, he was more at ease discussing his interest in young women. He said that criminalizing sex with teenage girls was a cultural aberration and that at times in history it was perfectly acceptable. He pointed out that homosexuality had long been considered a crime and was still punishable by death in some parts of the world.
Many prominent Silicon Valley figures have a reputation for being workaholics, but they’re actually “hedonistic” drug users who tasked Epstein with arranging sexual encounters (and we can infer what that means).
Mr. Epstein then meandered into a discussion of other prominent names in technology circles. He said people in Silicon Valley had a reputation for being geeky workaholics, but that was far from the truth: They were hedonistic and regular users of recreational drugs. He said he’d witnessed prominent tech figures taking drugs and arranging for sex (Mr. Epstein stressed that he never drank or used drugs of any kind).
Epstein showed off a photo of him with MBS. This was well before the murder of Jamal Khashoggi.
Before we left the room he took me to a wall covered with framed photographs. He pointed to a full-length shot of a man in traditional Arab dress. “That’s M.B.S.,” he said, referring to Mohammed bin Salman, the crown prince of Saudi Arabia. The crown prince had visited him many times, and they spoke often, Mr. Epstein said.
During their conversation, Epstein frequently took breaks to attend to his ‘currency trading’ (we’d be curious to learn which discount brokerage he preferred).
He led me to a large room at the rear of the house. There was an expansive table with about 20 chairs. Mr. Epstein took a seat at the head, and I sat to his left. He had a computer, a small blackboard and a phone to his right. He said he was doing some foreign-currency trading.
Epstein bragged about how his reputation didn’t stop people from attending his parties. He even considered becoming a minister to help himself appear more trustworthy.
He said this was something he’d become used to, even though it didn’t stop people from visiting him, coming to his dinner parties or asking him for money. (That was why, Mr. Epstein told me without any trace of irony, he was considering becoming a minister so that his acquaintances would be confident that their conversations would be kept confidential.)
A few months after their conversation, Epstein asked Stewart if the NYT business writer would be interested in writing his biography (presumably for a hefty fee).
Several months passed. Then early this year Mr. Epstein called to ask if I’d be interested in writing his biography. He sounded almost plaintive. I sensed that what he really wanted was companionship. As his biographer, I’d have no choice but to spend hours listening to his saga. Already leery of any further ties to him, I was relieved I could say that I was already busy with another book.
Stewart passed, but, looking back….
That was the last I heard from him. After his arrest and suicide, I’m left to wonder: What might he have told me?
via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2ZUQJwZ Tyler Durden
