The extreme lie of overproduction

Where would the rich Westerner end up with photovoltaics and electricity storage if he could no longer provoke the poor African with a "Your poverty pisses me off"?

Unbelievable, the USA and EU accuse China of overproduction. Do they believe there is no climate change? Do they believe in eternal oil? Do they believe in the unchanging world order of the rich West and the rest of the world remaining poor and being kept poor?

Yes, the global production of cars with combustion engines is sufficient, there is not enough oil for more anyway. Yes, global production of photovoltaics is too high if photovoltaics are only seen as a status symbol for the rich. Yes, the global production of rechargeable batteries is too high if they are only sufficient for emergency power production for the rich.

Where would the rich Westerner end up with photovoltaics and electricity storage if he could no longer provoke the poor African with a "Your poverty pisses me off"? Where would the Western do-gooder end up if his slogan "Refugees welcome" was answered with "No thanks, it's much nicer at home than in Germany"?

The only reason the Romans didn't conquer Germany was because the climate was too bad for them.

The motto of Western development aid is "maintain poverty, create relief". The €120 solar lamp to create jobs in Germany, only 8 times more expensive than a Chinese product. The pinnacle of relief: A bakery powered by photovoltaics.

Nothing is more alien to these Western aid workers than the idea that an African family could get into their electric car and visit relatives a few hundred kilometers away.

  The net-zero emissions mentality

Net zero emissions means reducing greenhouse gas emissions to a level that nature can absorb. For the rich, this means Maintain poverty, cause poverty, so that enough emission rights remain for the rich.

  The planetary restoration mentality

Planetary cleanup back to 350 ppm CO2 means around 47,000 TWh of electricity to filter 1 ppm CO2 from the atmosphere and recycle it into carbon and oxygen. Who can afford that? Only a rich humanity, 10 billion people in prosperity can do it.

  If in doubt, check all pages carefully

It is a decision between 3 directions:
  • Eternal fossils. Believe in eternal oil and that humans can never not have an impact on the climate.
  • Net zero emissions and everything will be fine again. Saving Restricting Renouncing as the most important means of achieving the target.
  • Planetary cleanup back to 350 ppm CO2. Global prosperity as a necessity to achieve the goal.
If in doubt, check all the arguments of all parties. What if this direction prevails and is able to realize its ideas?

  Enormous aids

There are now enormous tools for this. In the standard setting for grid-connected photovoltaics, you enter data on the system and receive monthly yields. But there is much more. Under "Off-grid" you can simulate a photovoltaic system with a battery. You can enter a daily consumption.
  • How many days is the battery full
  • How many days is the battery empty
  • What could not be saved in the cut
  • What was missing in the cut
In the meantime, I used the hourly data from 2005 to 2020 to test different scenarios with different power consumption, sodium batteries and iron-air batteries.

  Opinion survey on housing

The detached house is dead - long live the new detached house! The old detached house wasted a lot of energy, the new one produces so much solar power that it has become the backbone of a functioning energy transition. Where to live?
  • Apartment in a high-rise building with over 10 floors
  • Apartment in an old building in the old town
  • Apartment in a large city in a building with fewer than 10 apartments
  • Apartment in a rural area in a house with less than 10 apartments
  • Single-family house that keeps up with the price by selling its own electricity supply
Here is the result

  GEMINI next Generation AG will prove the contrary

It's not about whether the shares will be worth 10 times or 100 times more in 20 years' time or whether they will only be worth a few cents. It's about the future of us all. Will there be a big showdown between eco-fascism and yesterday's fossils, or will it be possible to overcome the deep divisions in society and inspire supporters of both sides to work towards a great new goal?

Global prosperity and planetary restoration instead of saving, restricting, renouncing and climate catastrophe or peak oil and a little more climate catastrophe. Both sides must be convinced that there is no solution that is even remotely viable.

On the one hand, it must be shown that net-zero emissions are a completely inadequate target and that the goal must instead be a planetary clean-up back to 350 ppm CO2. The other side must be shown that solar power enables a higher standard of living than fossil energy.

It's about survival! The social situation in 2024 compared to 2004. Extrapolating that to 2044 makes for a horror world! If we are successful and your shares are worth 100 times more, this is just an addition to all the other achievements.

One new shareholder said "I with my very modest investment", but €4,000 times €1,000 is also €4 million for all investments up to the opening of the settlement in Unken as a starting point for global expansion.

There is a reward program for recommending the share to others. Two of the new shareholders have become shareholders through this reward program.

Here are the details.
          The extreme lie of overproduction: Where would the rich Westerner end up with photovoltaics and electricity storage if he could no longer provoke the poor African with a "Your poverty pisses me off"?