I don't want to overplay this announcement of a ride-hailing firm announcing plans for a lease-to-own scheme for lower-emission vehicles in Nigeria. It may be far less than meets the eye. But it's *interesting*:
Conventional wisdom is that energy transition technologies like EVs will be very slow to spread to poorer countries, especially ones like Nigeria that are awash in relatively cheap crude oil. That clearly has implications for the whole trajectory of energy transition.
But if total cost of ownership for EVs is lower (as it is already in places like the U.S. and Europe), then price-sensitive emerging economies with fewer privately-owned vehicles might be expected to leapfrog richer countries in adopting them.
That's particularly the case where transport fuels are dependent on oil refinery capacity that's usually lacking in lower-income countries, with fuel costs at the mercy of currency movements (though a lot of sub-Saharan Africa is pegged to the euro).
As I say, this is just a press release. And the pilot will include gas vehicles. There may not be many EVs in this at all. But the proposal challenges a lot of conventional wisdom about how emerging economies' energy dynamics will develop over the coming years.
cf. Vitol's big deal yesterday to buy out the rest of African fuel retailer Vivo.
If you're wondering about vaccine hesitancy in Africa, it's really worth thinking about the experience with polio vaccinations and how to convince local populations to treat it as a priority.
This isn't rocket science and we did it with polio, but you have to actually do the work and learn the lessons rather than just going "muh vaccine hesitancy ¯\_(ツ)_/¯"
Key lesson: You gotta explain why you're treating this as a prioirity when people are still dying in huge numbers of cholera/TB/HIV which rich countries seem far less concerned about.
Is the U.S. vs. the British Empire a fair comparison?
The dominant factor of production in India, then as now, is labour, not land.
Does it look different if you compare c19th America to other land-rich colonies like Australia and Canada?
The water pipeline to Kalgoorlie in Western Australia, built soon after gold was discovered, seems a good example of "American know-how" ambitious development capital. A young Herbert Hoover worked as an engineer in the WA goldfields!
It's sort of endearing in a way that people still believe this fairytale story of development where it's all about where the governing ideology sits on a left-right axis, rather than deeper issues of trade, urbanization, industry, labor force change and capital accumulation.
Why did the interwar Soviet economy industrialise so rapidly when the Tsarist economy remained persistently agrarian? Because of orthodox Keynesian capital accumulation!
Marxists are obsessed with capital accumulation, that's literally what Das Kapital is all about!
The Soviet economy outperformed pretty much every major emerging economy over a 1914-1989 range barring Japan, though the stagnation after 1970 was profound.
China has been the world's best-performing economy ever since.
In general I agree 100% with what @mattyglesias says here, but in the specific case of Jamie Dimon I feel the more straightforward lesson is just that investment banking CEOs shouldn't make dickish comments about major clients.
For instance, how do you prevent fires in coal mines?
The best way is to avoid digging "gassy" deposits that let off a lot of methane; and regularly monitoring and servicing equipment and ensuring it's used within its rated capacity to ensure that you don't get sparks etc.
What happens when the order is to just produce more at all costs? You skip on maintenance, run machinery above its rated capacity, and look at reopening that geologically easy but riskily gassy deposit you mothballed in 2015.