![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](https://www.kitconet.com/images/sp_en_6.gif)
Silver next upswing
- Thread starter d-lod
- Start date
In your journey of appreciation of metals, like other market, you will here lot of noise. Deduct your own strategy based on your intuitions.
That was THE reason, I didn't listen to ALF FIELD, and predicted last correction.
The upward moves in metals were short covering and specially in silver.
The smart money already were transferred from share / bond and real estate in metal long back.
They never buy when small investor like us get attracted, and it is still time for sheeps to enter.
Thanks
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2010
- Messages
- 3,412
- Likes
- 3,233
The pleasure is mine, d-lod. I enjoy your succinct observations, and the clarity with which you convey them.
I also seem to be on a similar 'wavelength' as you in regards to what I see unfolding in the PM arena. I believe the gauntlet has been thrown and we are in a period which will eventually lead us to nominal 'highs' in gold, and silver, although perhaps at the expense of much general economic good fortune.
In the short term I believe we are in a battle to establish the depth of the current corrective wave. How deep or shallow it finishes off at will shed some light on the power of the next up move.
I also seem to be on a similar 'wavelength' as you in regards to what I see unfolding in the PM arena. I believe the gauntlet has been thrown and we are in a period which will eventually lead us to nominal 'highs' in gold, and silver, although perhaps at the expense of much general economic good fortune.
In the short term I believe we are in a battle to establish the depth of the current corrective wave. How deep or shallow it finishes off at will shed some light on the power of the next up move.
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2011
- Messages
- 7,952
- Likes
- 13,472
Another part of the puzzle..... what about all the other items that end up being mined.......... Is this a taxpayer funded metals search?
https://www.wsj.com/articles/if-you-want-renewable-energy-get-ready-to-dig-11565045328
Some good talking points when discussing the "New Green Deal" with renewable hawks.
If You Want ‘Renewable Energy,’ Get Ready to Dig
Building one wind turbine requires 900 tons of steel, 2,500 tons of concrete and 45 tons of plastic.
By
Mark P. Mills
Aug. 5, 2019 6:48 pm ET
Wind turbines in Palm Springs, Calif., July 13, 2017. PHOTO: PAUL BUCK/EUROPEAN PRESSPHOTO AGENCY
Democrats dream of powering society entirely with wind and solar farms combined with massive batteries. Realizing this dream would require the biggest expansion in mining the world has seen and would produce huge quantities of waste.
“Renewable energy” is a misnomer. Wind and solar machines and batteries are built from nonrenewable materials. And they wear out. Old equipment must be decommissioned, generating millions of tons of waste. The International Renewable Energy Agency calculates that solar goals for 2050 consistent with the Paris Accords will result in old-panel disposal constituting more than double the tonnage of all today’s global plastic waste. Consider some other sobering numbers:
A single electric-car battery weighs about 1,000 pounds. Fabricating one requires digging up, moving and processing more than 500,000 pounds of raw materials somewhere on the planet. The alternative? Use gasoline and extract one-tenth as much total tonnage to deliver the same number of vehicle-miles over the battery’s seven-year life.
When electricity comes from wind or solar machines, every unit of energy produced, or mile traveled, requires far more materials and land than fossil fuels. That physical reality is literally visible: A wind or solar farm stretching to the horizon can be replaced by a handful of gas-fired turbines, each no bigger than a tractor-trailer.
Building one wind turbine requires 900 tons of steel, 2,500 tons of concrete and 45 tons of nonrecyclable plastic. Solar power requires even more cement, steel and glass—not to mention other metals. Global silver and indium mining will jump 250% and 1,200% respectively over the next couple of decades to provide the materials necessary to build the number of solar panels, the International Energy Agency forecasts. World demand for rare-earth elements—which aren’t rare but are rarely mined in America—will rise 300% to 1,000% by 2050 to meet the Paris green goals. If electric vehicles replace conventional cars, demand for cobalt and lithium, will rise more than 20-fold. That doesn’t count batteries to back up wind and solar grids.
Last year a Dutch government-sponsored study concluded that the Netherlands’ green ambitions alone would consume a major share of global minerals. “Exponential growth in [global] renewable energy production capacity is not possible with present-day technologies and annual metal production,” it concluded.
The demand for minerals likely won’t be met by mines in Europe or the U.S. Instead, much of the mining will take place in nations with oppressive labor practices. The Democratic Republic of the Congo produces 70% of the world’s raw cobalt, and China controls 90% of cobalt refining. The Sydney-based Institute for a Sustainable Future cautions that a global “gold” rush for minerals could take miners into “some remote wilderness areas [that] have maintained high biodiversity because they haven’t yet been disturbed.”
What’s more, mining and fabrication require the consumption of hydrocarbons. Building enough wind turbines to supply half the world’s electricity would require nearly two billion tons of coal to produce the concrete and steel, along with two billion barrels of oil to make the composite blades. More than 90% of the world’s solar panels are built in Asia on coal-heavy electric grids.
Engineers joke about discovering “unobtanium,” a magical energy-producing element that appears out of nowhere, requires no land, weighs nothing, and emits nothing. Absent the realization of that impossible dream, hydrocarbons remain a far better alternative than today’s green dreams.
Mr. Mills is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a partner in Cottonwood Venture Partners, an energy-tech venture fund, and author of the recent report, “The ‘New Energy Economy’: An Exercise in Magical Thinking.”
Copyright ©2019 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8
Appeared in the August 6, 2019, print edition.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/if-you-want-renewable-energy-get-ready-to-dig-11565045328
Some good talking points when discussing the "New Green Deal" with renewable hawks.
If You Want ‘Renewable Energy,’ Get Ready to Dig
Building one wind turbine requires 900 tons of steel, 2,500 tons of concrete and 45 tons of plastic.
By
Mark P. Mills
Aug. 5, 2019 6:48 pm ET
Wind turbines in Palm Springs, Calif., July 13, 2017. PHOTO: PAUL BUCK/EUROPEAN PRESSPHOTO AGENCY
Democrats dream of powering society entirely with wind and solar farms combined with massive batteries. Realizing this dream would require the biggest expansion in mining the world has seen and would produce huge quantities of waste.
“Renewable energy” is a misnomer. Wind and solar machines and batteries are built from nonrenewable materials. And they wear out. Old equipment must be decommissioned, generating millions of tons of waste. The International Renewable Energy Agency calculates that solar goals for 2050 consistent with the Paris Accords will result in old-panel disposal constituting more than double the tonnage of all today’s global plastic waste. Consider some other sobering numbers:
A single electric-car battery weighs about 1,000 pounds. Fabricating one requires digging up, moving and processing more than 500,000 pounds of raw materials somewhere on the planet. The alternative? Use gasoline and extract one-tenth as much total tonnage to deliver the same number of vehicle-miles over the battery’s seven-year life.
When electricity comes from wind or solar machines, every unit of energy produced, or mile traveled, requires far more materials and land than fossil fuels. That physical reality is literally visible: A wind or solar farm stretching to the horizon can be replaced by a handful of gas-fired turbines, each no bigger than a tractor-trailer.
Building one wind turbine requires 900 tons of steel, 2,500 tons of concrete and 45 tons of nonrecyclable plastic. Solar power requires even more cement, steel and glass—not to mention other metals. Global silver and indium mining will jump 250% and 1,200% respectively over the next couple of decades to provide the materials necessary to build the number of solar panels, the International Energy Agency forecasts. World demand for rare-earth elements—which aren’t rare but are rarely mined in America—will rise 300% to 1,000% by 2050 to meet the Paris green goals. If electric vehicles replace conventional cars, demand for cobalt and lithium, will rise more than 20-fold. That doesn’t count batteries to back up wind and solar grids.
Last year a Dutch government-sponsored study concluded that the Netherlands’ green ambitions alone would consume a major share of global minerals. “Exponential growth in [global] renewable energy production capacity is not possible with present-day technologies and annual metal production,” it concluded.
The demand for minerals likely won’t be met by mines in Europe or the U.S. Instead, much of the mining will take place in nations with oppressive labor practices. The Democratic Republic of the Congo produces 70% of the world’s raw cobalt, and China controls 90% of cobalt refining. The Sydney-based Institute for a Sustainable Future cautions that a global “gold” rush for minerals could take miners into “some remote wilderness areas [that] have maintained high biodiversity because they haven’t yet been disturbed.”
What’s more, mining and fabrication require the consumption of hydrocarbons. Building enough wind turbines to supply half the world’s electricity would require nearly two billion tons of coal to produce the concrete and steel, along with two billion barrels of oil to make the composite blades. More than 90% of the world’s solar panels are built in Asia on coal-heavy electric grids.
Engineers joke about discovering “unobtanium,” a magical energy-producing element that appears out of nowhere, requires no land, weighs nothing, and emits nothing. Absent the realization of that impossible dream, hydrocarbons remain a far better alternative than today’s green dreams.
Mr. Mills is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a partner in Cottonwood Venture Partners, an energy-tech venture fund, and author of the recent report, “The ‘New Energy Economy’: An Exercise in Magical Thinking.”
Copyright ©2019 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8
Appeared in the August 6, 2019, print edition.
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2010
- Messages
- 3,412
- Likes
- 3,233
Yes. it does appear that institutional control of the price of metals is becoming less ironclad, and is weakening against demand that is forming among those who see a dilution trend associated with money printing and negative interest rates and understand that metals hold their value better in the face of all of this debt creation. I believe it will be a trend that will become overwhelming at some point.
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2010
- Messages
- 3,412
- Likes
- 3,233
Silver has to work very hard to show its strength, it is a late runner but a very fast one. Gold, in last run has been appreciated 7.55 times while silver was 12.5+ times appreciated.
There would be three MAJOR wave I, III, V. Each one subdivided in three upward swing of 1, 3, 5. This again are made of i, iii, and v, (for simplifying our understanding). If we assume rally from $4 to 49 as MAJOR wave I, than we are in MAJOR III,
and further we are in wave iii of 1
Its confusing a but silver has started upswing,
(i) 13.63 - 21.13 =7.5
(ii) 21.13 - 13.89 = 7.24 (almost double bottom
(iii) 13.89 - 21.39 / 25.89
if we don't get into minute wave counting than expect 21.39 or 25.89
There would be three MAJOR wave I, III, V. Each one subdivided in three upward swing of 1, 3, 5. This again are made of i, iii, and v, (for simplifying our understanding). If we assume rally from $4 to 49 as MAJOR wave I, than we are in MAJOR III,
and further we are in wave iii of 1
Its confusing a but silver has started upswing,
(i) 13.63 - 21.13 =7.5
(ii) 21.13 - 13.89 = 7.24 (almost double bottom
(iii) 13.89 - 21.39 / 25.89
if we don't get into minute wave counting than expect 21.39 or 25.89
Last edited:
This time, not only technical but fundamental is ignored, the last rise was due to 3 Trillion in deficit now when it has reached 5 Trillion, nobody is shouting from rooftop. Even housing and stocks are giving fake heads.
The above figures were given for stop setting only, it should not come true savvydon. If it come true than we have not consolidated, and there will be another buying opportunity. or else with physical buyer, the gold has to go up.
Lastly the institutional buyers want you to sale falsely. so they keep pressure, evoking trigger points.
The above figures were given for stop setting only, it should not come true savvydon. If it come true than we have not consolidated, and there will be another buying opportunity. or else with physical buyer, the gold has to go up.
Lastly the institutional buyers want you to sale falsely. so they keep pressure, evoking trigger points.
Last edited:
