Friday Musings: A Curated Collection from the Quote Vault

In a world of rapid change and enduring questions, here are some quotes to roll around in your mind when you take a break from your screens. From Subroto Roy’s vision of a flourishing society, to voices as varied as Hannah Arendt, Martin Luther King Jr., Edward Snowden, and Graham Greene, quotes that illuminate the human condition dealing with justice and bureaucracy, creativity and resilience, perception and courage. 

I personally enjoy mashups of unrelated observations because the unplanned juxtapositions can give birth to new and unexpected ideas. 

* * * 

"A flourishing society would be one which grows along the three planes of science, religion and art under conditions of freedom."
—Subroto Roy

"There is not enough darkness in all the world to put out the light of even one small candle."

—Rober Alden

"Writing is a form of therapy; sometimes I wonder how all those who do not write, compose, or paint can manage to escape the madness, melancholia, the panic and fear which is inherent in a human situation."

—Graham Greene

"More is more. Less is a bore."
—Robert Venturi

"Think twice before burdening a friend with a secret."

—Marlene Dietrich

"Men are not hanged for stealing horses, but that the horses may not be stolen."
-- The Marquis of Halifax

"Bureaucracies are far better at removing fingerprints from snafus than dusting for them."
—Mark Thompson

“The most radical revolutionary will become a conservative the day after the revolution.”

—Hannah Arendt

 

"Almost all our misfortunes in life come from the wrong notions we have about the things that happen to us."  

—Stendhal journal entry (10 December 1801)

"Never measure the height of a mountain, until you have reached the top. Then you will see how low it was."
--Dag Hammarskjold  

"Nothing is more common than the wish to be remarkable."

—Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.

"When exposing a crime is treated as committing a crime, you are ruled by criminals."

—Edward Snowden

“Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be.”

-–John Wooden

"I lived on books. Books taught me how to think."

--Sy Hersh

"A short saying often contains much wisdom."

—Sophocles

“Recommend virtue to your children, that alone—not wealth—can give happiness.”
— Ludwig van Beethoven

"A hot dog at the ballgame beats roast beef at the Ritz."
—Humphrey Bogart

"A day of bad writing is always better than a day of no writing."

--Don Roff

“If you can’t fly, then run, if you can’t run, then walk, if you can’t walk, then crawl, but whatever you do, you have to keep moving forward.” 

—Martin Luther King, Jr.

——————

Almost Wordless Wednesday: A Glimpse of Duluth Culture Revealed in 7 Posters of Coming Events

 A random batch of current posters on the library bulletin board.

Roy Orbison was truly one of the greats. Check this out:
Seven Anecdotes from the Roy Orbison/Beatles Tour

Proof positive that we're not just flyover country.

This weekend Duluth Dylan Fest will commence.  Be there or be square.

I saw them my freshman year in college... a fun memory way back when.

First class shows for those who love live theater.

It's becoming a Northland tradition.

Looks interesting. Should we come with an appetite?

It's safer than snake-handling in Kentucky.

"Words Can’t Reshape Physical Reality" – A Blunt Conversation with Energy Writer Irina Slav

Irina Slav

I can't recall when I first discovered the Bulgarian freelance energy journalist Irina Slav, but from the start I was captured, not simply by her years of experience writing about oil, gas, mining and geopolitics, but also by her wit and her courage to put it all out there regarding the realities of our current energy issues. Her writing is never dry, and routinely downright fun; a contrarian grounded in facts that force you to confront what is really going on. 

In short, she seems to enjoy telling truths many seem unable to see because they've been swept away in a fifty year flood of media mischief and misinformation. 

 

So without further adieu, I am pleased to introduce you to Irina Slav.

 

EN: I admire your courage and the "let the chips fall where they may" attitude you write with. How long have you been writing and how did you "find your voice" as a writer?

IS: If we’re talking professional writing, that started about 15 years ago, but I’d been writing fiction since my teens. I think that helped train my writing “muscles” for any topic, fictional or factual.

As for finding my voice, that happened gradually, as I gained experience and realized there was no point in being polite and worrying about what people would think. I honestly no longer care about offending anyone with hard facts. They are there, whether anyone likes them or not.

EN: Have you always written about energy issues? What was your background and what drew you to write about this important topic?

IS: My academic background is in English literature and linguistics. My professional life began with translations, while I was still at university. After graduating, I spent a couple of years at a daily newspaper where I mostly translated articles but once got so excited about the topic of peak oil (yes, I believed it was coming) that I volunteered to produce my very own feature article. I think we still have the paper edition with that article.

After I left the paper (because the owner, who was a politician, asked me if I wanted to run for the European Parliament as a party candidate and I said “Hell, no”) I started work at a news agency where I was assigned coverage of Russia’s and Central Asia’s energy and mining industries. I discovered oil and gas are a fascinating topic and started reading up on it, on extraction, pipelines, refineries, the lot.

Following my decision to go freelance I had a major stroke of luck when an editor for Oilprice contacted me and offered me a daily engagement. The rest, excuse the cliché, is history. I still find oil and gas production fascinating and hugely underappreciated as the most essential industry for modern civilization. This doesn’t mean I love Big Oil or some such nonsense but I do have a deep appreciation for the people who extract hydrocarbons from the ground.

EN: You’ve spent nearly two decades covering Russian and Central Asian oil and gas before broadening out to global energy markets. Looking back, what’s the biggest misconception you’ve seen policymakers or investors hold about energy security—and how has the last few years of conflict and market chaos either validated or upended that view?

IS: The most destructive, delayed-action, misconception was the belief that globalizing supply chains would work swimmingly and it’s perfectly okay to outsource all the heavy industries to Asia to focus on the “post-industrial” economy. We’ve all seen how well that’s worked.

More generally, the assumption that words can shape physical reality has wrought havoc in the West, whether it’s about energy or geopolitics. We are now reaping what the reality shapers sowed.

EN: In your writing, you’ve highlighted “stranded transition assets” and grid integration failures for renewables, even as banks like Barclays now acknowledge the risks. Do you see the current energy crunch—driven by geopolitics, AI demand, and defense needs—as the moment when the renewables-heavy transition narrative finally cracks, or is the political momentum still too strong to reverse course?

Click to Enlarge

IS: The narrative has been cracking for a while now but the net-zero fan lobby is still very strong and loud, especially in political circles. I think the momentum is too strong for politicians to admit they were wrong about it. The current energy crisis is not helping – it just made wind and solar make sense because they are – and how I hate the word – “homegrown”. They aren’t really but nobody cares about that. I fear we’ll have to witness an actual collapse before we come to our collective senses.

EN: You’ve been blunt about EU policies like the ETS, the 2035 ICE car ban (and its green steel workaround), and methane rule “flexibilities.” From your perspective in Bulgaria, what’s the single biggest disconnect between Brussels’ decarbonization targets and the day-to-day reality of energy supply and industrial competitiveness in Europe?

IS: The biggest disconnect is in priorities. Brussels keeps harping on about “clean” energy while everyone else wants mostly cheap and reliable energy.

EN: Your recent posts have touched on blackouts, demand destruction, negative electricity prices, and the quiet return of gas-fired power in places like Spain. What practical lessons from these real-world failures do you think the energy industry and governments still refuse to learn—especially when it comes to baseload power versus intermittent sources?

IS: What governments appear incapable of comprehending is the fact that it is not okay to have a grid dominated by intermittents. Having some is fine, no problem with rooftop solar and some bigger installations in factory yards but having solar and wind make up a substantial, let alone, larger than half, portion of the energy mix is a bit risky.

EN: You’ve written about parallel realities in energy—one physical and one fabricated by analysts and financiers. With oil prices swinging on tweets, record U.S. exports, and surging Chinese “clean energy component” shipments to Europe,  do you see the biggest risks (or opportunities) in the next 12–24 months for both traditional hydrocarbons and the so-called transition technologies?

IS: I think it’s pretty clear by now that hydrocarbons will be in short supply in the coming months. Just how long these shortages will last depends on when the war in the Middle East ends and the outlook doesn’t seem very good right now. So, the risk is shortage, which, I guess, would be an opportunity for those who can source oil and gas and sell them to energy-thirsty countries.

As for transition technologies, the fans will double and triple down, claiming they are safer than oil and gas imports. The problem is those technologies are also largely imported and they will become more expensive, too – energy inflation touches everything. So I think there will be some more rude awakening in the “clean energy” space. 

EN: After covering this beat for 15–20 years and living through events like the recent Bulgarian blackout, what’s one piece of advice you’d give to younger journalists, investors, or even ordinary citizens trying to cut through the noise on energy and geopolitics—especially when official narratives keep colliding with physics and economics?

IS: The one advice I would give is “Check if two plus two makes four. If the news says it doesn’t, then the news is false.” It’s a simple thing to do but not easy. A lot of people would rather stick with the false news for comfort, even if they end up paying dearly for that comfort down the line. Those who are not satisfied with “the noise” ask questions. They also buy generators for backup.

Check out her Substack, Irina Slav on energy 

Lessons for Leaders from Napoleon and the Battle of Austerlitz

My interest in Napoleon Bonaparte was triggered by an observation made in the introduction to Grant Wins the War, James R. Arnold's account of how General U.S. Grant captured the City of Vicksburg, cutting off supplies from the West and sealing the doom of the rebel South in our American Civil War. The author stated, "Of the twenty most brilliant campaigns in military history, more than half were by Napoleon. Only two were conceived and executed by generals in the U.S. Civil War. The first was General Stonewall Jackson’s Shenandoah Campaign. The second, Grant’s victory at Vicksburg."

That simple statement made me seriously interested in learning more about this man. One of the first things I learned was that there were more books written about Napoleon than any other person in the 19th century. After a little research I purchased Chandler's 1200-page The Campaigns of Napoleon, the first hundred pages serving as an outstanding overview of his life, career, philosophy, achievements and more.

* * * 

The Battle of Austerlitz—often called “The Battle of the Three Emperors”—was Napoleon’s greatest battlefield triumph. Fought near the town of Austerlitz in what is now the Czech Republic, it pitted Napoleon Bonaparte against the combined armies of Austria and Russia, led by Emperor Francis II and Tsar Alexander I.

Napoleon’s Objective

Napoleon’s central objective was not merely to defeat the Allied army, but to destroy it decisively enough to break the coalition against France and secure French dominance in Europe. He understood that France could not survive endless coalitions forming against her. He needed a victory so overwhelming that it would psychologically and politically shatter his enemies. 

And that is precisely what happened. After Austerlitz, the Austrian Empire sued for peace, and the old Holy Roman Empire effectively collapsed soon afterward.

Napoleon’s Strategy

Understanding the map is not important 
to getting the point.

Napoleon’s brilliance at Austerlitz lay in deception. He intentionally appeared weak. He thinned his right flank and even abandoned the strategically important Pratzen Heights—high ground in the center of the battlefield. To the Allies, this looked like hesitation or vulnerability. They believed Napoleon was retreating and vulnerable to encirclement.

But this appearance of weakness was bait. Napoleon predicted the Allies would overcommit against his deliberately weakened right side. Once they did, their own center on the Pratzen Heights became dangerously exposed. That was the trap.

At the decisive moment, Napoleon launched Marshal Soult’s corps directly into the weakened center, splitting the Allied army in two. Fog lifted as the French attacked, and the sudden appearance of disciplined French columns emerging into sunlight became legendary, later romanticized as “the Sun of Austerlitz.”

As I read this battle description, I was reminded of Napoleon's 1805 naval defeat at the hands of Britain's Admiral Horatio Nelson, whose bust Napoleon had on his desk out of respect for this master strategist. The Battle of Trafalgar took place only two months earlier so it must have been fresh in Napoleon's mind. You can read here the strategy Lord Nelson used to rout his opponents in Trafalgar, dissecting the combined French and Spanish navies to create mass confusion.

Once the center collapsed, the Allied flanks became isolated and disorganized. Thousands drowned retreating across frozen lakes and marshes, though later accounts may exaggerate the scale of this catastrophe.

Napoleon had achieved what military theorists call the destruction of enemy cohesion.

Famous Quotes Associated with Austerlitz

Napoleon was extraordinarily conscious of morale, symbolism, and memory. Before the battle, he reportedly told his troops: “Soldiers, I shall end this campaign with a thunderbolt.”

And after the victory: “One sharp blow and the war is over.”

Another famous line associated with his philosophy of war: “Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.” 

That sentence almost perfectly summarizes Austerlitz. He allowed the Allies to execute the very maneuver he wanted them to attempt.

Another relevant Napoleon quote: “The moral is to the physical as three is to one.”

Napoleon understood that wars are fought not only with weapons and numbers, but with confidence, fear, perception, momentum, and belief.

Lessons for Today

Austerlitz still fascinates military strategists, business leaders, and political thinkers because its lessons extend far beyond warfare.

1. The Power of Controlled Weakness

Napoleon demonstrated that appearing weak can lure opponents into overconfidence. (Is this currently what has been happening in Iran?) Strategic patience and misdirection can be more effective than raw force. Modern parallels appear in diplomacy, politics, media, and business competition.

2. Concentration at the Decisive Point

Napoleon did not try to be strong everywhere. He identified the decisive moment and concentrated force precisely there. This principle still governs successful strategy today: Focus resources, identify leverage points and avoid dispersion.

3. Information and Perception Matter

Napoleon manipulated what the Allies believed about him. In many ways, Austerlitz was an information war before it became a shooting war. Modern conflicts—political and military alike—are often battles over narrative, confidence, morale, and interpretation. 

4. Overconfidence Destroys Judgment

The Allies believed Napoleon was retreating because they wanted to believe it. Their assumptions blinded them. Austerlitz remains a warning about confirmation bias: leaders often see what flatters their expectations.

5. Leadership Under Pressure

Napoleon projected confidence even when circumstances were risky. His calmness transmitted itself to the army.

Whether in war, politics, or business, morale frequently flows downward from leadership.

The enduring fascination of Austerlitz is that it was not merely a victory of force, but a victory of psychology, timing, deception, and clarity of vision. Napoleon made his enemies participate in their own defeat.

Related Trivia

Ludwig van Beethoven's Symphony No. 3 in E-flat major, Op. 55, known as the Eroica ("Heroic"), is a monumental 1804 work that redefined symphonic form, marking the transition from Classical to Romantic music. Originally dedicated to Napoleon Bonaparte, it is a revolutionary, large-scale composition characterized by its intense emotion, long duration, and dramatic use of dissonance

Related Link

Goethe on Napoleon
https://pioneerproductions.blogspot.com/2010/04/goethe-on-napoleon.html

Air Quality Keeps Getting Better, But Wind Turbines Do Have Drawbacks

Remember how smelly diesel trucks used to be and how loudly their engines clattered? Remember those photos of the Pittsburg skyline with smokestacks belching black smoke from the steel mills and the dense black clouds that hovered over the hills of the city? Do you recall the firehouses on the Cuyahoga River that runs though Cleveland, firehouses built because the river was in the habit of catching fire four times a year?

These were a few of the memories that came to mind as I read yesterday's Energy Bad Boys' column titled Harvard Study Finds Wind Turbines Will Cause More Warming Than Emissions Reductions Would Avert. And the clever subhead: Hot air from the wind indusry.

The column begins, "A few weeks ago, we wrote about how Gallup polling found 66 percent of Americans think the environment is getting worse despite the fact that air quality in the United States has improved dramatically since the 1970’s. This improvement was due in large part to the Clean Air Act and its subsequent amendments, as a reader noted."

The authors argue that if the goal is to avoid harmful warming, why build something that causes immediate, noticeable local warming for people, animals, and plants living near the turbines today — especially when the climate benefit is small and far in the future?

They estimate the extra warming from all those turbines could cost the U.S. economy $72–75 billion per year in damages (based on earlier studies of warming costs).

Here's another consideration when discussing wind and solar. The size of their physical "footprint" compared to the energy they produce.

Click chart to enlarge

Bottom Line

Wind (and solar) are often hyped as planet-saving technologies, but they come with their own real, immediate temperature impacts. Instead of spending trillions on wind, the authors strongly suggest we should choose nuclear power instead, because it produces reliable electricity with almost no emissions and no local air-mixing warming effect.

I mention these things because our current Minnesota energy policies include a moratorium on nuclear (based on fear driven by misinformation) and a mandate to be "Net Zero" by 2040. [Fwiw, "Net Zero" in environmental law and policy refers to a state where the amount of greenhouse gases (GHGs) emitted into the atmosphere by human activities is balanced by an equivalent amount removed from the atmosphere over a specified period.]  

And however you slice it, wind and solar still have that major issue of intermittency so that it may not be there in the moments you need it most.

Related Links

Harvard Study Finds Wind Turbines Will Cause More Warming Than Emissions Reductions Would Avert

Groups align to lift Minnesota's nuclear energy ban

Is Our Energy Grid at Risk?

Wind farms pictured: Northern Iowa, Southern California, West Texas, San Gorgonia Pass