Category Archives: Energy, Politics and Economic Prosperity

Energy, Electricity, Economic Prosperity and Environmental Protection, Energy, Politics and Economic Prosperity, Fossil Fuels are Important, History of Energy and Electricity 1850-1980, Keeping America Great

History of Energy and Electricity

2 Comments

Part 3, 2010-2022, by Dick Storm

AMERICA BUILDS THE CLEANEST, MOST EFFICIENT COAL PLANTS IN THE WORLD, ACHIEVES ENERGY INDEPENDENCE, BEGINS RESHORING AMERICAN MANUFACTURING, CLEANS OUR AIR AND THEN….

COMMITS SELF INFLICTED ENERGY EUTHANASIA

My intention for the first two parts of the “History of Energy and Electricity Generation” was to outline the importance that energy and electricity played in improving our quality of living & growing our economy to become the largest in the world. America is still the world’s largest economy, but if we continue on the Net Zero Carbon Path of the “Green New Deal” then America will become weaker and China’s influence in the world will exceed America’s. Perhaps not a problem if China was run by Boy Scouts with high morals. But, the CCP does not share our values.

At current trends of economic growth, China’s GDP is likely to surpass the U.S.A.’s before 2030. The Sub-Title of this post is a reminder that during the Obama Presidency America’s Energy Policy was essentially committed to a Self-Inflicted path of energy euthanasia for our great country.  Meanwhile, China ramped up energy production from All Fuel sources. I have written before on the relationship of energy and economic prosperity. That was the theme of parts 1 & 2 of this series. Abundant, reasonable cost energy fueled America’s economy for all of the 20th Century as America became the most productive country in the world with the world’s largest economy.

TWO MAGNIFICENT POWER PLANTS MADE IN THE U.S.A

On a positive note, let’s start with a description of two magnificent Ultra-supercritical clean coal plants. Made in the U.S.A. and amongst the best coal plants ever built. We should have more like these being built now!

AEP Company’s John Turk Ultra-Supercritical Power Plant
Turk Plant Boiler Island and Some of the Air Emissions Control Equipment

The Best Clean Coal Plants Ever Built, Sadly amongst the last ones Built in the U.S.A.

In December 2012 one of the finest examples of American Clean Coal Plants started up. The 600 MW John W. Turk Plant in Arkansas. Power Magazine(3) awarded the plant the highest honor in 2013 for clean, reliable and efficient power generation. Here below is an excerpt of the article in POWER Magazine.

“AEP’s SWEPCO requested proposals in December 2005 for new generation to meet long-term capacity needs, and by August 2006 the company settled on coal-fired technology for a new plant site in Arkansas. Construction began in early 2008, and the new plant entered commercial service in December 2012. For overcoming numerous legal and regulatory obstacles and for building the first ultrasupercritical plant in the U.S., the John W. Turk, Jr. plant is awarded POWER’s 2013 Plant of the Year Award. 

The new 600-MW John W. Turk, Jr. Power Plant owned by American Electric Power’s (AEP) Southwestern Electric Power Co. (SWEPCO) is located on a 2,800-acre tract near Fulton, in Hempstead Country, Arkansas, about 20 miles northeast of Texarkana. The Turk Plant, the first modern plant in the U.S. to commercialize ultrasupercritical (USC) boiler technology, was officially declared commercial on Dec. 20, 2012.”

The specifications are impressive. The steam generator is rated at 650 MW power generation capacity. The steam generator evaporates 4,420,000 pounds per hour of water to superheat to 1,100 degrees F. Think about what that means. Four million pounds per hour, if it is expressed as gallons per minute, the evaporation rate is the equivalent flow in GPM of about 8,800 gallons per minute.  This quantity of water is pumped at a pressure of over 4,400 pounds per square inch and then super-heated to over 1,100 degrees F. every minute. That still impresses me to think about it. Thanks to the American metallurgical and welding technology, the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code and over 150 years of experience, that is one of the American Power Industry’s most magnificent accomplishments, in my opinion.

Plants such as Turk can do this 24/7 constantly and at a high-capacity factor. Unlike Wind or Solar Power, the Turk Plant is fully Dispatchable too.  That is why I describe plants such as Turk and Longview as magnificent! They are truly engineering marvels.

Another example of a modern, efficient supercritical coal plant is the Longview Power Plant near Morgantown, West Virginia. Longview has also attained the accomplishment of becoming the most efficient coal plant in America (different years for Turk and Longview)

Longview Power Plant Located in WVA, Award for Most Efficient Power Plant in U.S. in 2016 by POWER Magazine

Both Turk and Longview are clean coal plants equipped with Flue Gas Desulfurization equipment, Baghouses for particulate collection and Selective Catalytic Reactors for Oxides of Nitrogen correction. Called “Clean Coal because the truly harmful pollutants have been removed.

These two highly efficient HELE Plants, (HELE=High Efficiency Low Emissions) are amongst the last several major coal generating plants built in America. That’s right, about 2012 marked the end of new coal plant design and construction of coal plants in America. Few people outside the power industry understand the implications of what this means for our future. 

Let me state here that I worked my entire career in the pursuit of excellence in coal power generation. Including efficiency and emissions improvements. I believe in clean air and clean water. The EPA was needed in 1970 because acid rain, fine particulates and ground level ozone were problems which large coal fired power plants contributed to. The success of the efforts of the EPA to clean the air is best described on the chart below which is prepared by the EPA(11). 

EPA Comparison of Economic Growth and Air Quality 1970-2018

From my viewpoint, cleaning the air of harmful emissions was accomplished by the time that Obama became President. From that point on, the EPA was weaponized against the best interests of America. Weaponzizing the EPA to create what I call, Energy Euthanasia. It continues today with the Climate Policies that are Destroying America. Check reference # 15 below, Donn Dears Book entitled, “NET-ZERO CARBON, THE CLIMATE POLICY DESTROYING AMERICA”

Weaponizing the EPA:

Commiting to the Present Path of Climate Policy has Seriously Wounded America’s Supply Chain for Power Generation Equipment

The Obama years 2008-2016 set a course for American Energy that were very difficult. Especially for coal power. During Obama’s Presidency, he led the EPA to declare that Carbon Dioxide should be regulated. This was later, upheld by the Supreme Court, the CO2 regulations, right or wrong, became the law of the land. Here is a short summary of how the “War on Coal” during the Clinton administration ratchetted up to becoming “The War on Carbon” and becoming lethal for American Energy Independence, the Fossil Power Plant Equipment Supply Chain & the Economic growth and prosperity that Energy Independence provides.

According the WSJ April 18, 2009, “In 1998, the Clinton administration EPA studied the question and determined that the Clean Air Act was “potentially applicable” to CO2 and other greenhouse gases. But despite continued pressure from environmental groups, the Clinton administration never moved to regulate the gases.

The EPA lumped carbon dioxide with five other gases — methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride — into a single class for regulatory purposes. That’s because they share similar properties: All are long-lived and well-mixed in the atmosphere; all trap heat that otherwise would leave the earth and go into outer space; and all are “directly emitted as greenhouse gases” rather than forming later in the atmosphere.”

According to the bulk of somewhat biased scientific research, such as that assembled by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the more greenhouse gases there are in the atmosphere, especially carbon dioxide, the more heat is trapped. That leads to rising temperatures. The EPA endorsed the (Politically Biased) IPCC research and specifically said that “natural variations” in climate, such as solar activity, couldn’t explain rising temperatures. For the record, I believe that global rising temperatures have mostly been from natural forces for thousands of years, even before the Ice Age. I am not a Climate Scientist, but there are many highly qualified well credentialed Climate Scientists that I agree with. Such as Professor Richard Lindzen, Judith Curry, Roy Spencer, John Christy, Steven Koonin and many more. Here below is an excerpt from Koonin’s book, “Unsettled, What Climate Science Tells Us and What it Doesn’t and Why it Matters”(18) His closing thoughts are in green font below:

Dr. Steven E. Koonin is a leader in science policy in the U.S. He served as Undersecretary for Science in the Dept. of Energy under President Obama.

“What we think we should do, in short, is begin by restoring integrity to the way science informs society’s decisions on climate and energy-we need to move from The Science back to science. And then take the steps most likely to result in positive outcomes for society, whatever the future might hold for our planet. As President Biden exhorted in his inaugural address, “We must reject the culture which facts themselves are manipulated, or even manufactured”

In my opinion, Dr. Koonin is correct, we should let science get back to science and that much of the huge volumes of research on manmade climate change has been politically inspired, not science inspired.

The current policy of “Net Zero Carbon” has been based on politically biased science and is driven by special interests, but not in the best interests of America.

Further, the Chinese for one country outside the U.S. have worked to  influence alarm with American University students to go green. See reference below (10) where Professor Lindzen of MIT writes on China’s recent actions.

China is Fortifying Their Supply Chain, While We are Self-Inflicting Harm on Ours

The Weaponization of carbon became very effective during the Obama Administration. Interrupted by President Trump and then intensified under the Biden Administration. The path to harm the Fossil Power Systems and Fossil Power Production was ratcheting up to becoming more and more lethal. (Lethal to the Made in U.S.A. supply chain) Electricity prices were kept reasonable and the Greenhouse Gas emissions reduced during this time, thanks to the Shale Gas Revolution.

The Shale Gas Revolution Aids the War on Coal

As the War on Coal progressed, the public was insulated from electricity price rises due to enormous natural gas productivity and falling natural gas prices. The graph below shows the path of natural gas prices/million BTU’s from 2006-2012. Ultimately, gas prices dropped to levels below coal prices on a $/million Btu basis. This illustration was used for a training class I was involved with in 2012 to a coal plant staff to emphasize why excellence in O & M and best Heat-Rate operations were important for competitive power generation from coal. At the time, natural gas fueled power generation had suddenly became less expensive than coal. This is because in a Thermal-Power Plant, most of the electricity generation cost is for fuel. In GTCC (Gas Turbine Combined Cycle) plants the fuel cost component is about 90% of the production cost of electricity. Thus, doubling fuel cost/million Btu’s by itself nearly doubles the production cost of electricity. Conversely, halving the fuel cost nearly halves the production cost for electricity generation.

Also during this time Gas Turbine Combined Cycle Plant technology had improved to approach 65% Thermal Efficiency. The most efficient Heat-Engines in History. Thus, it appeared between 2010 and 2020 that America could wage war on carbon and enjoy economic prosperity including the lowest electricity costs in the world.  We also had the largest drop in Carbon Dioxide emissions in the world. A 52% drop.

The following charts will illustrate the path from 2005 forward of reducing carbon emissions and keeping electricity prices reasonable.

First, fuel changes from coal to natural gas created drastic CO2 emissions, because natural gas generated electricity produces about 50% of the CO2 that coal fueled plants do. 

Because electricity produced by natural gas creates about half the carbon dioxide as coal generated electricity, the first 50% reduction in Greenhouse Gases was painless. Low natural gas cost (Thanks to the Shale Gas Revolution) plus high efficiency GTCC plants provided this huge first step.

The increase in natural gas power production replaced coal power production. Together, coal, gas and nuclear still provide over 80% of our electricity. The chart above is 2004-2019. The one below is the actual (Dispatchable too!) generation across the U.S.A. in September-October of 2021:

The two pie charts of generation by Fuel (below) are from the Midwest Independent System Operator (MISOEnergy.com) and the PJM Interconnection (PJM.com) for January 26, 2022. Note the importance of coal power generation. Again, coal, nuclear and natural gas are providing over 80% of our nation’s electricity generation when it is most needed. Many of the coal plants providing this power are planed to be shut down in the next few years. They will be missed. Note reference(17) below, list of coal plants to be retired in the next few years.

AMERICA ACHIEVES ENERGY INDEPENDENCE IN 2019

US Department of Energy, EIA

The U.S. Supply Chain for Manufacturing Fossil Power Systems Equipment

Besides the importance of reliable, reasonable cost electricity, there is the Supply-Chain which we should all be concerned about.

The Supply Chain of Coal Plant Components includes thousands of tons of components. Once manufactured solely in the U.S.A., these components provided hundreds of thousands of jobs. For example, when I worked for B&W in 1969, B&W employed over 35,000 employees. Combustion-Engineering also employed over 35,000 employees. General Electric and Westinghouse Electric back then employed hundreds of thousands of employees. America was the world’s #1 manufacturer and this served our country very well. Take a look at the illustrations below of major coal plant components during construction.

A large clean coal plant involves tens of thousands of tons of steel manufacturing, seamless high alloy tubing, high pressure piping, hundreds of miles of copper wire, transformers, steam turbines, large pressure vessel manufacturing, pumps, heat exchangers, motors, generators and many other components. Manufacturing of these components involves hundreds of thousands of jobs for skilled engineers, technicians and craftsmen. The Supply-Chain is very large and spreads all across the U.S.A. Here below is a list of the suppliers to the Turk Plant. This is from the POWER Magazine article.

We stopped building large coal plants about 2014. With that comes a withering and loss of our productive manufacturing capacity. Recently, our Supply-Chain woes have been in the news. My friends ask me, How could we invent computer chips and then lose the capability to produce them here in the U.S.? How about steel tubing, steel shapes, aluminum, Rare Earth minerals and EV components? Pharmaceuticals? Where do most of these come from now? Most, come from China. China is the World’s largest manufacturer, so it seems reasonable to accept the published data that shows China using more energy than any other country.

China Energy Consumption, compared to the Rest of the World

From BP Statistical Review

Meanwhile, China is Getting a Lot of Practice in Building Large Coal Power Plants, All of the Equipment Involved and Many Other Products…..

Pakistan Power Plant, Financed and Built by China
From LinkedIn Post by Mike Caravaggio

Boston University has a web site that tracks China Coal Plants:

Closing Summary

In my life-time I saw America as the top Industrialized Country of the world. We shared our wealth and technologies with other countries in good faith. Then for whatever reasons, the people of great influence, mostly from the American Democrat Party, sought to weaken our productive capacity and to cede that capacity to the Chinese Communist Party. The Mainstream News, Entertainment and most Democrats have all been part of this transfer of productive capacity and with that productive capacity comes influence in the world.

It is my hope that sometime soon, our President and Congress will wake up and see the importance of energy to power our economy. The U.S. Senate Report, “Europe’s Energy Crisis, A Warning to America” should be read by all elected officials.(15) The other references below are also informative.

Dick Storm, January 30, 2022

References:

  1. How Carbon Dioxide Became a Pollutant, April 18, 2009, WSJ : https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB124001537515830975
  2. COP-26 Climate Conference article, Oct. 30, 2021, WSJ : https://www.wsj.com/articles/cop26-climate-summit-consensus-is-sought-after-decades-of-false-starts-11635598801?cx_testId=3&cx_testVariant=cx_2&cx_artPos=5&mod=WTRN#cxrecs_s
  3. John W. Turk Power Plant wins POWER Magazines highest honor for clean coal: https://www.powermag.com/aeps-john-w-turk-jr-power-plant-earns-powers-highest-honor/
  4. Longview, Rehabilitated Coal Power Plant Most Efficient in U.S. POWER Magazine, August 2016: https://www.powermag.com/longview-power-plant-rehabilitation-results-efficient-u-s-coal-plant/ https://www.powermag.com/longview-power-plant-rehabilitation-results-efficient-u-s-coal-plant/   
  5. China to Build 43 new coal plants, “Time” August 2021: https://time.com/6090732/china-coal-power-plants-emissions/
  6. China could build more coal plants even after Xi promises not to, Bloomberg Oct 2021: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-27/climate-cop26-china-could-build-new-coal-plants-overseas-even-after-xi-pledge  
  7. China’s Coal Plant Capacity More than 3 X the Rest of the World’s, Reuters, Feb 2021China’s new coal power plant capacity in 2020 more than three times rest of world’s: study:https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-coal/chinas-new-coal-power-plant-capacity-in-2020-more-than-three-times-rest-of-worlds-study-idUSKBN2A308U
  8. Hassyan Power Plant in Dubai: https://www.nsenergybusiness.com/projects/hassyan-coal-fired-power-plant-dubai/
  9. Hassyan Power Plant ACWA Power web page: https://acwapower.com/en/projects/hassyan-ipp/
  10. China Warming, Tablet Magazine by Richard Lindzen, October 19, 2021: https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/science/articles/china-warming-richard-lindzen
  11. EPA Progress in Cleaning our Air: https://gispub.epa.gov/air/trendsreport/2019/#growth_w_cleaner_air
  12. Mid America Independent System Operations, MISO Energy: https://www.misoenergy.org
  13. PJM Interconnection, Independent System Dispatch of Electric Power for much of the Northeast and west to Chicago: https://www.pjm.com
  14. Boston University Global Development Policy Center: https://www.bu.edu/cgp/
  15. U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Report; “Europe’s Energy Crisis, A Warning to America”: https://www.energy.senate.gov/services/files/2D862C16-4157-4A39-9CCE-098B5C818C01?mc_cid=d94787db9d&mc_eid=9e46528ac6
  16. Donn Dears Book, “NET-ZERO CARBON, The CLIMATE POLICY DESTROYING” AMERICA:  https://amzn.to/31j7vMh  
  17. Reuters, List of Coal Plants Scheduled to be shut down: https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-coal-fired-power-plants-scheduled-shut-2021-10-28/
  18. Steven E. Koonin, “Unsettled, WHAT CLIMATE SCIENCE TELLS US,WHAT IT DOESN’T, ANDWHY IT MATTERS” 2021, BenBella Books, Inc.
economic prosperity and energy, Energy, Politics and Economic Prosperity

ENERGY AND ECONOMIC PROSPERITY

2 Comments

A few weeks ago, I commented on a post on LinkedIn by Donna Castro. My question was, “I wonder what the correlation is between Economic Prosperity and Energy Use”. So, to answer my own question I did a little research and here is the result of that search.

The “Visual Capitalist”(1) published the graphic above Dec. 21, 2021. I have been interested in the relationship of energy use to fuel Economic Prosperity for many years and liked this graphic.

The total world GDP is projected to be 94 Trillion Dollars. Only 18 countries have greater than a 1% share of the total world economy. The U.S.A. and China comprise about 42%. The ten largest economies are:

So, back to my curiosity of relating energy use to economic output, I thought it would be useful to show the top ten countries ranked by total energy use. Statista and other organizations list these. I used the chart from Statista. Not surprisingly, the data from all sources show the largest economies use the greatest quantity of primary energy. China is the world’s largest manufacturer and they produce over 50% of the world’s steel and aluminum. Primary metals production is very energy intensive, thus, it is expected that China will use the greatest amount of primary energy and they do.

Chart by Statista.com

The Net-Zero Carbon Emissions Policies of America brings to mind the threat to our economic prosperity and our comfortable life styles. I have written my thoughts on Net-Zero Carbon, the War on Coal, War on Carbon and my opinion of Net-Zero Carbon, in other posts on my Blog.

A new book by Donn Dears is available which has lots of background and details with fresh information of why the Net-Zero Carbon policies of the Biden Administration are harmful to the U.S.A. I recommend his book for anyone who is interested in the relationship of Economic Prosperity and Reasonable and well thought out Energy Policy. Net-Zero Carbon and the current “Green” initiatives in Congress are not reasonable and not well thought out by people who understand energy and electricity generation.

The Net-Zero Carbon Emissions Policies of America brings to mind the threat to our economic prosperity and our comfortable life styles. How can we reshore more manufacturing and become energy independent again by following anti-American energy policies as laid out in the path to Net-Zero Carbon? I have written my thoughts on Net-Zero Carbon, the War on Carbon and my opinion of this policy on this Blog and other publications. However, Mr. Dears has done a very nice job of condensing many issues of Net-Zero Carbon into about 100 pages.

Donn Dears.org

Note the Sub-Title: Which correctly states, “The Climate Policy Destroying America”

The theme and title of this post is “Energy and Economic Prosperity” the current U.S. Climate Policy is weakening America and Mr. Dears is correct with his choice of sub-title.

I recommend his book and the information available on his web page for reference on Energy Policies that affect our Economy and our life styles:  https://ddears.com

I have been concerned about the war on coal and now the war on carbon for many years. Not only is Net-Zero carbon harmful to the U.S.A. but it is also slowing down Human Development of countries in the Developing World. Going back to the first illustration above, note that the U.S.A. and China comprise 42% of the World’s GDP and that only 18 countries exceed 1% of the total 94 Trillion Dollars of World GDP. 

Energy and Human Development Index

The Illustration below is available on the ExxonMobil(3) website and is based on U.N. data.  Note that 50% of the world’s countries and 20% of the world population do not have fuel for cooking. I personally have experienced walking down the streets of cities in numerous Developing countries. I have witnessed heavy pollution which stings the eyes. Such pollution is not found in the U.S. Many Asian countries still use cow dung for indoor cooking.

My point: The Net-Zero Carbon Path that the U.N. has adopted does not serve the Developing countries very well either.

ExxonMobil Outlook for Energy 2021: https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/-/media/Global/Files/outlook-for-energy/2021/2021-Outlook-for-Energy-fundamentals-infographic.pdf

Let me show another of my favorite illustrations of Energy Poverty in the world. This is the NASA Composite Photo, “The Earth at Night”. These night time photos show the differences of energy and electricity abundance or shortages by the illumination that is visible from space. First let’s look at Africa and Europe: 

NASA, Earth at Night Composite Photo

NASA, Satellight Photo at night showing Europe and the continent of Africa. Also apparent in the Human Development Chart above showing Yemen and Nigeria as two Developing countries that have a low HMI (Human Development Index) with a corresponding low energy consumption.

Compare this to the United States at night below:

Conclusions:

  1. The U.S. President & Congress’ quest to enact Net-Zero Carbon into law will weaken America’s capability to sustain our economy and our life styles.
  2. Energy and Economic Prosperity are inextricably linked and restricting energy production and development weakens our country. Don’t forget the Fossil fuels needed for our Nations Defense. F-22’s and F-35’s require high quality Jet fuel.
  3. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) both of which are worldwide, are harmful to Developing Countries as well as OECD countries.
  4. The only winners in the UNFCC and IPCC agreements (if they are fully implemented) is China and Russia.

For more details, I suggest reading Mr. Dears books on the subject. He has written several excellent texts.

Dick Storm, January 3, 2022

References:

  1. Visual Capitalist:  https://www.visualcapitalist.com/visualizing-the-94-trillion-world-economy-in-one-chart/
  2. Statista.com for ranking of energy use by country: https://www.statista.com/statistics/263455/primary-energy-consumption-of-selected-countries/
  3. ExxonMobil Outlook for Energy 2021: https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/-/media/Global/Files/outlook-for-energy/2021/2021-Outlook-for-Energy-fundamentals-infographic.pdf
  4. NASA, “The Earth at Night” composite photo: https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/ContentFeature/NightLights/images/media/BlackMarble_2016_EuroAfrica_composite.png
  5. https://eoimages.gsfc.nasa.gov/images/imagerecords/79000/79800/dnb_united_states_lrg.jpg
  6. NASA Earth Explorer: https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/map#6/40.000/-100.000
Energy, Electricity, Economic Prosperity and Environmental Protection, Energy, Politics and Economic Prosperity, Uncategorized

World of Hurt from Climate Policies-Part 4

Leave a comment

This is an excellent review of the relationship of energy and prosperity. Especially in Africa where reasonable cost coal plants could lift millions from poverty.

Ron Clutz's avatarScience Matters

CO2 and COPs

This is a fourth post toward infographics exposing the damaging effects of Climate Policies upon the lives of ordinary people.  (See World of Hurt Part 1 , Part 2, and Part 3 )  And all of the pain is for naught in fighting against global warming/climate change, as shown clearly in the image above.  This post presents graphics to illustrate the fourth of four themes:

  • Zero Carbon Means Killing Real Jobs with Promises of Green Jobs
  • Reducing Carbon Emissions Means High Cost Energy Imports and Social Degradation
  • 100% Renewable Energy Means Sourcing Rare Metals Off-Planet
  • Leave it in the Ground Means Perpetual Poverty
The War Against Carbon Emissions Diminishes Efforts to Lift People Out of Poverty

world-population-in-extreme-poverty-absolute
The OurWorldinData graph shows how half a billion people have risen out of extreme poverty in recent decades.  While much needs to be done, it is clear that the world knows the poverty…

View original post 584 more words

economic prosperity and energy, Energy, Electricity, Economic Prosperity and Environmental Protection, Energy, Politics and Economic Prosperity, Environmental, Fossil Fuels are Important, History of Energy and Electricity 1850-1980, Regulations

King Coal is Dead. Long Live the King!

1 Comment

Coal has been important to lift people from poverty to good lives for about 150 years. The Developed world made great progress from 1900 to present day thanks to reasonable cost coal power. The Electric Utilities once educated the public on power generation and “Living Better Electrically” Any of us born before 1950 can remember the Edison Electric Institute Mascot, “REDDY KILOWATT”. What a wonderful benefit that was for Humankind. As a high school student I actually knew where electric power came from and the basics of Thermal Power Plants.

Then ironically, about the time of the 1973-74 Arab Oil Embargo, I was working for Carolina Power and Light Company. A responsible and efficient Electric Utility headquartered in Raleigh, NC. I remember as a fact, CP&L cut the Public Relations Budget which included killing programs in schools to teach Home Economic Students the benefits of “Living Better Electrically”. Also, TV and Newspaper articles to explain the importance of electricity. So, what filled the void? The Environemntal Extremists filled the void. Then in the 1990’s Bill Clinton’s Presidency began the “War on Coal”. Later the war on coal morphed into the war on carbon.

Thank you Ron Clutz for writing your article. I will post a couple pictures of life without Fossil Fuels. As John Kerry flies around the world professing to save the Planet, I suppose this is what he and the Biden Administration wish for us to do, return to muscle power. This is preposterous considering we are well into the Digital and Space Age!

King Coal is Dead. Long Live the King!
An Amish Teenage Girl with Team of Horses Plowing circa 1960
economic prosperity and energy, Energy, Politics and Economic Prosperity, Environmental, Nuclear

Without new thinking on nuclear power, (anti Carbon) climate policy can’t succeed

1 Comment

This is copied from the Tennessee Star Tribue Newspaper Opinion page, Nov. 11 2021. Full credit is given to the author, Mr. John Windschill. Thanks also is given to my friend Don Spellman for forwarding to me. I thought this is well researched and well written. As for myself, I believe Climate Change is mostly from natural forces, but if a reduced carbon society is desired and our quality of life and freedom is to be continued, then nuclear power must be included along with all other fuels.

The perceived dangers are overestimated. 

By John Windschill

From Dick Storm course at USCB-OLLI on the Future of Energy and Electricity Generation

A summer of destructive flooding, fires and drought across the planet, coupled with a sobering update from the United Nations climate panel, indicates that we are likely not making adequate progress addressing climate change. And our climate change ambivalence is especially obvious when it comes to nuclear power.

Despite nuclear power having potential to greatly reduce the fossil-fuel emissions that are responsible for about 70% of U.S. transportation- and electricity-related carbon emissions, and despite nuclear power being among the safest means of electricity production we have (as reported in Forbes, the Lancet and the Journal of Cleaner Production), many well-run nuclear plants are being retired.

In the last eight years, 11 nuclear reactors were retired in the U.S. This year four more are scheduled for permanent closure. These plants collectively represent 14,700 megawatts of electrical supply — enough electricity for 10 million people.

Consider the experiences of Germany, France and Sweden. Germany’s decision to forgo nuclear power has resulted in its falling far short of its carbon emission goal. France, which receives 72% of its electricity from nuclear, has less than half the carbon emissions of Germany, and electricity prices that are 40% lower. Sweden’s electricity is 40% nuclear, with prices 35% below Germany’s and per capita carbon emissions that are 57% lower.

Critics of nuclear power identify fear of accidents and a belief that a solution for waste disposal does not exist as reasons to oppose nuclear power. Neither of these is valid. People are afraid of nuclear power because it pushes all the wrong emotional buttons. As a result, the very low risk that nuclear power entails is not appreciated.

At the core of the fear of nuclear power is a fear of ionizing radiation (hereafter simply referred to as radiation). Radiation is extremely common in our environment. It is a straightforward substance to monitor and control, and its impact on public health is well understood. Each second natural background radiation interacts with our bodies more than 10,000 times. These natural sources account for about half of the radiation dose the average American receives, with the remaining half coming from medical procedures. The 60 operating nuclear power plants in the U.S. contribute less than 0.01% from routine operations.

The two basic ways a nuclear power plant can increase public radiation doses are accidents and waste disposal. Three accidents have occurred that affected the public. These, in increasing order of severity, were Three Mile Island in 1979 in Pennsylvania, Fukushima in 2011 in Japan, and Chernobyl in 1986 in Ukraine. This history of nuclear power over 42 years proves how safe nuclear power is.

At the Three Mile Island accident there were no health effects. Nuclear Regulatory Commission reports indicate the average radiation dose received by members of the public living near the plant was far below natural background radiation levels.

Fukushima released more radioactive materials than Three Mile Island, but because of effective emergency response efforts, public radiation doses were low. The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation and the World Health Organization (WHO) concluded that there would be no observable health effects in the public from the accident.

The Chernobyl accident was basically the most severe nuclear power plant accident that is possible. International Atomic Energy Agency and WHO reports indicate that the only cancer that has been detected from the accident is thyroid cancer, which has led to 15 related fatalities. Among initial responders, 28 tragically died of acute radiation poisoning at the time of the accident.

Based on conservative estimates, it is possible that a few thousand might die within 50 years of cancers not epidemiologically detectable among the background cancer rate. This puts a cap on the worst-case result. A few thousand people die each day in the world due to air pollution from fossil fuels and also from auto accidents. With more than 37,000 fatalities worldwide since the Three Mile Island accident, commercial air travel has about a 10 times larger impact on public health and safety.

For comparison among electrical generating sources, the fatality rate per billion kilowatt-hours generated is: coal, 25; natural gas, 2.8; global nuclear, 0.074 (includes an assumed 4,000 future deaths from Chernobyl); wind, 0.035; hydro, 0.024; solar, 0.019; and U.S. nuclear, 0.0001.

And the lessons learned from the three accidents described above have been effectively applied to make safe nuclear power even safer.

Regarding high-level nuclear waste, James Conca (who has Ph.D. in geochemistry from California Institute of Technology) says, “We know where to put nuclear waste, how to put it there, how much it will cost, and how well it will work.” An oft-repeated phrase is that high-level waste is dangerous for tens of thousands of years, but the fact is that high-level waste loses 99% of its toxicity within 600 years. And while high-level waste is very toxic material, it is less hazardous than gasoline.

The U.S. produces 50 times more lethal doses of gasoline each year than lethal doses of high-level waste; we carry our gasoline with us pretty much everywhere we travel, and it is stored much less carefully than nuclear waste.

The very small volume of high-level waste allows meticulous control to be achieved. Each U.S. resident’s lifetime share of high-level waste would fit in a single can of Coke. Kilowatt for kilowatt, solar power waste has 10,000 times greater volume than nuclear waste, and wind’s total is 500 times larger, each involving large amounts of toxic metals in panels and batteries. Also, nuclear waste is an inert solid within a metal casing (i.e., spent nuclear fuel), not green, oozing goo.

And yet, wind and solar get an environmental hall pass, but nuclear power is labeled as exceedingly dangerous.

The current concept is to secure the solid waste in highly robust steel containers, and to store the containers in an accessible manner that allows routine monitoring and inspection in a deep underground repository free of groundwater that has been geologically stable for millions of years. Yucca Mountain north of Las Vegas was selected for study.

Prof. Bernard Cohen of the University of Pittsburgh calculated that if all the electricity in the U.S. were provided by nuclear power, it would result in 0.3 deaths per year in the U.S. due to waste storage. Should we be concerned with tiny quantities of nuclear waste migrating from a very remote, highly engineered and easily monitored facility sometime in the far distant future, or with the millions of tons of carbon dioxide and harmful particulates we currently pump into the air to breathe and cause our planet to heat up?

Yet in 2011 President Barack Obama defunded the Yucca Mountain project. Again, faulty risk assessment and politics won out over science and sound public policy.

We should be insisting that our government more vigorously pursue this valuable technology that could be a difference maker for addressing climate change. Bill Gates has helped form a new company, TerraPower, whose mission is to bring nuclear power plant design forward to the next level of safety and economic performance. In a recent quote from Forbes, he said “there are only three ways to solve the electric grid problem: one is a miracle in [energy-battery] storage, the second is nuclear fission, and the third is nuclear fusion.”

Wind and solar have a vital role to play, but we should not be putting total reliance on a miracle.

economic prosperity and energy, Energy, Politics and Economic Prosperity, Environmental, Regulations

IPCC Data: Rising CO2 is 75% Natural

3 Comments

I have always believed Climate Change was mostly natural, here is a more scientific presentation showing 75% Natural forces are the cause of Climate Change. Thank you Ron Clutz for your analysis..

Ron Clutz's avatarScience Matters

A previous post reprinted later below raised the question Who to Blame for Rising CO?  It provided synopses of three studies challenging the IPCC orthodox explanation that humans are the cause by burning fossil fuels.  This post brings the research up to date with a 2021  publication by Edwin Berry.

The graph above summarizes Dr. Berry’s findings.  The lines represent CO2 added into the atmosphere since the 1750 level of 280 ppm.  Based on IPCC data regarding CO2 natural sources and sinks, the black dots show the CO2 data. The small blue dots show the sum of all human CO2 emissions since they became measurable, irrespective of transfers of that CO2 from the atmosphere to land or to ocean.

Notice the CO2 data is greater than the sum of all human CO2 until 1960. That means nature caused the CO2 level to increase prior to 1960, with no reason to…

View original post 2,989 more words

economic prosperity and energy, Energy, Politics and Economic Prosperity, Environmental, Fossil Fuels are Important, Politics & Management

The War on Carbon, How it Came to be:

3 Comments

Climate Change has been going on since well before the Romans. Certainly well before coal was burned for power generation. Yet, the main stream news is fixated on Climate Change being the result of the Developed World’s use of Fossil Fuels over the last 100 years. The MSM has completely blown off the possibility that Climate Change is mostly Natural. I am a proponent for reasonable cost, abundant energy and the resultant improved quality of life. I am also interested in protecting the environment, and I love nature just as much as any environmentalist does. Reasonable cost Energy improves quality of life and is referred to by some as improving the “Human Developmet Index”. It concerns me that the most reasonable cost and proven sources of energy have become somewhat socially unacceptable. Such as coal, oil, gas and nuclear. Ironically, these four forms of energy are the one’s that provide about 90-96% of the Developed World’s energy. Many Financial Institutions are reluctant to loan money to Developers of mines, fossil fueled power stations or refineries. Even though there are still almost a Billion people on the planet that have limited or no access at all to electricity. Energy and Economic prosperity go together.

A slide from a recent course I presented. The data are from the UN, Our World in Data and ExxonMobil’s Outlook for Energy

So, this begs the question: Why would so many in the MSM, Entertainment, Politics, Education and the General Public be against the very things that make our high quality of lives possible? As I was thinking about this, it occurred to me that perhaps it would be helpful to remind folks of how we have arrived at this absurd place in history. Here are my thoughts and research of how the “War on Carbon” came to be. This is purely Politically Driven, not based on science or protection of the planet.

The UN Agenda 21

It was 1993 and Bill Clinton was President of the U.S.A. with Al Gore as Vice President. Executive Order #12858 was signed.(1) This is my understanding of the beginning of the “War on Coal”. The U.N. Agenda 21 began in a conference in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. It brought together concerns for our environment, Socialism, Secular Humanism, and the world banking cartels. U.S.A involvement began in 1992, with then good intentions, by President George H.W. Bush. Bush #41 referred to Agenda 21 as encompassing “Sacred Principles”. Then the good intentions deteriorated into viscious, effective and well funded attacks on coal. The cost to Americans was blunted due to the near simulateous successes of the Shale Gas Revolution which greatly increased production of Domestic natural gas and drove natural gas prices downward. In the short term, the low natural gas prices actually hurt coal power more than the extremists and Democrat’s smear campaigns. However, the damage was permanent with no new coal plants being built in the U.S.A. since about 2012. Many older coal plants have been irreversibly decommissioned and hundreds demolished. Many of these plants could have been operating now had they been maintained. I hate to say the Environmental Extremists have won, but it looks like they have. But, who benefits from the Environmental Extremists apparent success? In my view, the only beneficiaries are China, Russia and other adversaries of the U.S.A.

Now, natural gas prices are escalating and even the Left Leaning MSM talk of expected high energy bills in winter and possible energy shortages. Therefore, given this scenario, I thought it was timely to review, from my vantage point, just how this madness came to be.

War on Coal 1993-2012

The Democrat’s have hated coal for many years. The only reason I can rationalize their hate, is because the well funded Environmental Groups usually support Democrat’s. Here below is an excerpt from Wikipedia on the “War on Coal”(6)

“A goal of the Sierra Club is to replace coal with other energy sources.[31] Through its “Beyond Coal” campaign, the Sierra Club has set a goal to close half of all coal plants in the U.S. by 2017. American business magnate and former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg donated $50 million to the Sierra Club’s anti-coal work in 2011, and announced another $30 million gift to Sierra’s Beyond Coal campaign in 2015.[32]The Beyond Coal campaign says 187 coal plants have been closed since 2010.[33] Other funders of the Sierra Club’s anti-coal campaign include the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.[34] The CEO of Chesapeake Energy, a natural gas company, donated $26 million to the Beyond Coal campaign between 2007 and 2010.[35]

The Sierra Club is also opposed to nuclear energy.[36][37] “

Then, piling on with the MSM and the environmental organizations comes the allying of the public schools and teaching (indoctrinating) extreme green policies to our teenagers many of which have now grown up to be adults.

In addition to demonizing of carbon in Public Schools the general public is bombarded with “Save the Planet” propaganda by entertainment personalities, and the  MSM.  Here is a short history of the War on Coal by Politico(7): https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2015/05/inside-war-on-coal-000002/ 

The Democrat’s hated coal and then that hate has morphed into hate of all Fossil Fuels. The (D’s) are supported by Environmental organizations (4,5) that mostly, also hate nuclear. So, the Democrat’s and Environmentally (Like Bush 41, they have good intentions) conscious citizens tend to oppose the one carbon-free form of power that is efficient, reliable, proven and capable of Dispatchable operation at high-capacity factor. The generation (it has been 28 years since Clinton signed EO) of youth that were indoctrinated to hate coal and nuclear are now voters.

This is my summary of “How the War on Carbon” has brought us to Congress working on a Stupid and anti-American Path to Net Zero Carbon. A path that only benefits adversaries of the U.S.A. The best word I can think of to describe these policies is “Stupid”.

A better path would be to continue energy independence using Hydraulic Fracturing and production of all of America’s oil and gas, including pipelines for safe transport of oil and gas. Build many more new nuclear plants to produce more nuclear power generation for both electricity generation and for hydrogen production. Also, build new highly efficient coal plants with the future capability for CCUS (Carbon Capture, Utilization and Storage) Called HELE (High Efficiency Low Emissions)

In closing, my view is that all forms of energy are important including; nuclear, coal, oil and gas. By the way, another reason that supports this is the fact that about 96% of America’s energy is provided by conventional energy as shown below. Disrupting the supply chain of Domestic energy will weaken America.

These views are my own and not those of any organization that I have been part of. I take full responsibility for these opinions and they are based on my personal experiences in the electric power industry over many decades.

Richard F. (Dick) Storm, PE

PS I just came across this post by the GWPF (Global Warming Policy Foundation) A reminder that all the meetings and hype are strictly Political, not about getting Results:

References:

  1. Living with Agenda 21, Surrendering Our Freedoms by Dr. H. Lawrence Zillmer, Copyright 2012
  2. U.N. Agenda 21 Info: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf
  3. U.N. Sustainable Development Report, 2021: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/UN-DESA_Back_Common_Future_En.pdf
  4. Capital Research Center, Report on Climate Dollars https://www.climatedollars.org/full-study/a-short-history-of-global-warming-fears/
  5. The NEW Leviathan, Crown Forum, NY 2012 Check Appendix X and summary of $9 Billion in Assets
  6. Wikipedia, “War on Coal” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_coal
  7. Politico, “War on Coal” https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2015/05/inside-war-on-coal-000002/
  8. War on Coal, Issues in Science and Technology: https://issues.org/real-numbers-president-obamas-war-on-coal/
  9. An Excellent video of some very smart Patriots, The Right Stuff Climate Team (Retired NASA Engineers): https://www.therightclimatestuff.com
  10. Donn Dears well written and practical articles: https://ddears.com/donns-articles/
  11. Michael Shellenberger on John Shanahan Website. Solar Panels make more waste than nuclear: https://www.allaboutenergy.net/energy/238-energy/today/wind-and-solar/north-america/862-100-percent-renewable-energy-rested-on-a-lie-michael-shellenberger-environmental-progress-mark-jacobson-usa
  12. Armstrong Economics, Great article on CO2 and the politics of the “War on Carbon” aka, “Manmade Climate Change” https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/climate/3rd-attempt-to-publish-this-google-interferes/
  13. EPA New Source Review  Settlements Summaries: https://www.gem.wiki/EPA_Coal_Plant_Settlements
  14. EPA Settlements on NSR violations by WEPCO 2003: https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/wisconsin-electric-power-company-wepco-clean-air-act-civil-settlement 
  15. Dissertation on the Sierra Club Success of Beyond Coal Campaign 2020: https://www.proquest.com/openview/b734be1b4fa402463fbb2ee03a7993e5/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
  16. Inside the War on Coal Politico, The Agenda 2015: https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2015/05/inside-war-on-coal-000002/
  17.  NRDC China Office: https://chinadevelopmentbrief.org/ngos/natural-resources-defense-council-nrdc/  
  18.  Government Accountability Office Report on Environmental Protection Agency–Application of Publicity or Propaganda and Anti-Lobbying Provisions EPA Lobbying, 2015: https://www.gao.gov/products/b-326944
  19. NRDC About us and link to IRS 990 Form: https://www.nrdcactionfund.org/about/
  20. Influence Watch, NRDC page: https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/natural-resources-defense-council-nrdc/
  21. Washington Examiner: Gina McCarthy CEO of NRDC: https://eelegal.org/washington-examiner-gina-mccarthy-and-nrdc-together-again/
  22. Wrong Kind of Green, NRDC and Source Watch: https://www.wrongkindofgreen.org/the-group-of-ten/natural-resources-defense-council/
  23. Bezos awards $100 million to NRDC : https://www.nrdc.org/media/2020/201116
  24. Bezos plans to give Billions to Environmental Org’s: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/20/jeff-bezos-pledges-1-billion-to-conservation-through-bezos-earth-fund.html
  25. Activist Facts,  Environmental Report (Follow the Money): https://www.activistfacts.com/organizations/19-natural-resources-defense-council/
  26. Washington Examiner 2013 EPA and Sue and Settle Lawsuits: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/epas-back-room-sue-and-settle-deals-require-reform
  27. Activist Facts, Sierra Club, Beyond Coal, Beyond Gas, Nuclear :https://www.activistfacts.com/organizations/194-sierra-club/
  28. Mother Jones 2012, Sierra Club “War on Coal” update to kill 167 coal plants: https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2012/04/map-american-coal-plants/
  29. AEP Newsletter to employees and Retirees on Turk Plant Settlement: https://aepretirees.com/2011/12/22/aep-resolves-all-legal-challenges-against-turk-plant-plant-on-track-to-begin-commercial-operation-in-2012/
  30. PowerEngineering Articles on Turk and Duke Coal plant closures, 2/01/2012: https://www.power-eng.com/renewables/aep-resolves-all-legal-challenges-against-turk-plant/#gref
  31. Source Watch Brags on NRDC being responsible for forcing shutting down of Seven major coal plants in Texas in 2007: https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Natural_Resources_Defense_Council#Support_for_coal_gasification
  32. Environmental Defense Fund: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_Defense_Fund
  33. Influence Watch profile of EDF: https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/environmental-defense-action-fund/
  34. WUWT, Article, July 8, 2022, Green Communism, Eradicate the Energy Privilege of Rich Countries:  https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/07/08/green-communism-eradicate-the-energy-privilege-of-rich-countries/

economic prosperity and energy, Energy, Electricity, Economic Prosperity and Environmental Protection, Energy, Politics and Economic Prosperity, Fossil Fuels are Important

830,000 Btu’s per Day/Person

Leave a comment
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory Energy Flows of the U.S.A. 2020

Congress and our President are in the process of forcing Net Zero Carbon, Green Energy on all of us. In my view what this will do is increase prices of energy, make our energy less reliable, make America less competitive and in general, harm our quality of life. In thinking about this and attempting to explain why I feel this way, it occurred to me that if all of the citizens knew where our energy comes from and how much we depend on it each day, perhaps more of us would pressure our Congressmen/Congreswomen to resist this foolishness. So, here is my stab at explaining where our energy comes from and why the “Green New Deal” is so harmful.

I have been involved in the energy business for many years and the one chart that explains energy flows best, is the DOE Sankey diagram above. This shows the sources of all of our energy and how it is used throughout the economy. I have been watching this for about 20 years and interestingly, the total U.S. energy use has held steady at about 100 Quadrillion Btu’s per year. In fact, I will show a graph below of the U.S. Energy use by year from 1950-2019.

Where does the 830,000 to a million Btu’s per day come from? If we divide 100 Quadrillion Btu’s by the population of 330 million, then the per capita energy use is about 303 million Btu’s/person/year. Divide the 303 million Btu’s per person/year by 365 days and it comes out to about 830,000 Btu’s/day/person.

This is average and of course, a person living in a small condo that does little travel, will use less energy than a person who lives in a 2500 square foot home, owns a small fishing boat and travels the world. Lets say the latter example would use more than a million Btu’s per day. This energy could be in gasoline, natural gas, propane for the grill, electricity for HVAC of the home and for cooking. Included in the allottmant of per capita energy use is our share of industrial production, commercial buildings, shipments of goods and government use for the military. Below is an illustration of the forms of energy we might use each day.

So what does this have to do with the “Green New Deal” and the Clean Energy Plan Congress is about to pass? Well, if we are accustomed to living productive lives using conventional energy sources such as outlined above, then how can we sustain our high quality of lives by substituting wind turbines and solar panels for the 96.2 Quadrillion Btu’s provided by conventional forms of energy? Note that on the first figure above, the Sankey diagram I have inserted the total wind and solar in 2019 provided 3.8% of our energy. Petroleum, natural gas, nuclear, coal, biomass, geothermal and old hydropower dams provided the other 96.2%

Let’s get to electricity. The total energy used in 2019 was 100 Quadrillion Btu’s and 37% of this was used to generate electricity. So if we look into the future of EV’s and eliminating the internal combustion engine, then the energy used for transportation will need to come from electricity. Lots more electricity. How does the “Net Zero 2050” proponents think they will get to zero carbon emissions? By windmills and solar. Lots of windmills and solar. Here is an illustration from the Princeton University Net Zero Path.

My opinion is that if this path is taken, it is totally impractical and harmful to America, our way of life and our national security.

After many years of tax subsidies, wind and solar produced 3.8% of our energy in 2019. Texas, Hawaii and California have their own applications of too much renewable power which resulted in Blackouts in CA and TX and the highest electricity costs in the nation for Hawaii. How can we expect zero carbon based fuels by 2050 and still maintain a strong economy and enjoy our way of life. Perhaps more important to our grandchildren, keep English as our primary language, not Mandarin? The next three charts show the relationship of carbon emissions and manufacturing by a few selected countries.

I will close with the fact that according to a report I saw in S&P Global, China has the four largest banks in the world. The relationship of energy use and economic prosperity cannot be denied. China built more power generation in twenty years than America did since Thomas Edison’s first Pearl Street Station was commissioned.

Vaclav Smil’s quote of “Energy is the Universal Currency” comes to mind.

China loves America’s Net Zero 2050 and the “Green New Deal” Maybe they even wrote them?

Dick Storm, September 16, 2021

economic prosperity and energy, Energy, Politics and Economic Prosperity, Keeping America Great

Energy, Human development index and economic prosperity

1 Comment

Two Examples: America in the 20th Century and China in the 21st

I prepared for a presentation to USCB-OLLI on the history of Energy and Electricity. Along the way of preparing it hit me. Few professors of either history or engineering discuss the relationship of energy and Economic prosperity or for Developing Countries, the relationship of energy and an improving Human Development Index. My friends that are employed in the energy business know this. But, it also occurs to me that we are a small minority, perhaps only a few million out of 330 million American citizens. Most citizens do not really understand until a hurricane kills electric power or a pipeline shutdown causes gas lines. Only then does the average American appreciate the importance of energy to our way of life.

Here is my shot at helping to connect the dots of the importance of energy:

At the turn of the 20th century, coal fuel was important and remained our largest primary energy source until about the end of WWII. Then petroleum took off as the largest source of primary energy. Why? Of course, because of the popularity and convenience of automobile travel and of course, air travel too. Key point: Our economy grew exponentially as a result of abundant and reasonable cost energy. The chart of GDP per person was prepared by “Our World in Data”. Americans in 2017 had the highest standard of living of any country listed on the chart. A short answer would be Freedom, Capitalism and American policies. In my opinion, the one factor not given proper credit for, is abundant and reasonable cost energy. We reached energy independence by 2020 and America’s electricity costs are amongst the lowest in the world.

Together, reasonable cost energy and electricity fuels a thriving economy, jobs and manufacturing productivity. America’s leadership in the Industrial world is at risk, given the foolish and un-scientifically based policies coming from Washington regarding anti-Carbon and Green Energy.

America was once the most productive manufacturer in the world. From 1900 to about the year 2000, the U.S.A. was the world’s largest manufacturer. Especially for steel and aluminum. Then China was admitted to the World Trade Organization and through foreign investments, including U.S.A. based companies, built their manufacturing base. Now, according to Statista and other references, China is the world’s largest manufacturer.

Energy factored into the importance of America’s economic growth in the 20th Century. Likewise, energy is the pre-requisite for China’s growth in the 21st Century. China built more electric power production power plants in 20 years than America did in the preceding 150 years. Most of these are coal fueled and China now burns about 57% of teh world’s coal. Yes, more coal is consumed by China than all of the rest of the world’s countries combined.

The point is, energy powered not only an improving Human Development Index, but energy is required to power a growing industrial economy. It did so in America in the Century America led the world and energy is powering China’s economy at the beginning of the 21st Century. This is described on the chart below by mcKinsey & Company.

I have written my thoughts, (based on facts) some of the reasons why the Green New Deal is against the best interests of America. Let me stop here for now. The key point I wish to make is, Energy and Economic Prosperity are linked. Reasonable cost, abundant electricity and energy is a pre-requisite for our comfortable life styles as well as National Security. America has a treasure of energy within our borders. It is beyond foolish to not use it.

Ron Clutz has written in Science Matters, an excellent post on the relationship of energy and poverty and how the War on Carbon, better known as “Climate Policies” will harm the poor of the world. It is here: https://rclutz.com/2021/08/07/world-of-hurt-from-climate-policies-part-4/

Some will ask, “What about Climate Change”. Well the best 30 minute presentation I have seen to dispel manmade Climate Change is Professor William Happer’s talk at Hillsdale College.

To Watch the Video Proving there is No Climate Crisis, go to: 

How to think about Climate Change 

A talk at the National Leadership Symposium of Hillsdale College 

Phoenix, AZ, February 19, 2021 

By William Happer 

A key segment begins at minute 24 where the effects of CO2 are discussed. https://bit.ly/3zsXcS6

So, I ask, why are the Democrat Party politicians in Washington working hard to weaken America?

Dick Storm, June 22, 2021

Energy, Politics and Economic Prosperity

US war on carbon accomplishes two things

Leave a comment
  1. Strengthens China and China’s influence in the world
  2. Weakens America

I was just reading in the morning wsj that another pipeline (in addition to Keystone) has been shut down between Canada and the US. This one operated by Enbridge was a new pipeline to replace a 67 year old existing pipeline with newer, safer construction.

This action is apparently by the Governor of Michigan. But, she has similar (D) views on the War on Carbon as Biden and the rest of the Democrat Party.

Biden’s Executive Order to rejoin the Paris Climate Agreement is anti-American, just as President Trump said it was. The assault on carbon based fuels in the year 2021 is moving fast to further disadvantage or cripple America’s manufacturing might. At the same time, much of the world manufacturing (and economic prosperity that could have fueled America’s economy) is shifting this prosperity to China and Russia. It doesn’t seem to matter to these US politicians that 88% of our total energy comes from conventional sources. By conventional I mean both Fossil and Nuclear energy. Yes, 88% of our energy. The current admistration wishes to crush fossil fuels and is doing little to support nuclear. America had just reached Energy Independence and in the name of “Green Religion”. (What else can you call it?) Biden (and all of the Democrat’s I can think of) wishes to self inflict severe economic harm to American and Canadian industries. What are Biden and the Democrats thinking?

Meanwhile, China is designing, manufacturing, lending and building coal power plants all over the Planet in the Developing Countries of the world. Why? They are seizing the opportunity to show how they can help lift people out of poverty better than the U.S.A. can. Quite honestly, the “Belt and Roads Initiative” is in fact, lifting many out of poverty. Heading into Communism isn’t such a great idea but when folks are living in squalor with no clean water to drink, no job and little electricity, being controlled by the CCP is far down their worry list.

Now, let’s just suppose two American companies like Babcock and Wilcox, a 154 year old magnificent US Manufacturer and General-Electric another world class manufacturer, want to build a new coal power plant in one of Africa’s countries. In my early days of working for B&W, I remember US Foreign Aid was done by exporting American manufactured power plants and more. Great American companies like B&W, Westinghouse, Combustion-Engineering, Foster-Wheeler, Riley Stoker and more. Great memories for me of the 1960’s, It seems the Chinese took notes on our successful policies and are now applying the U.S.A.’s 1960’s model of USAID to their best interests. China calls it the “Belt and Roads Initiative” (BRI). It was win-win in the 1960’s for the U.S.A.. American jobs were provided to design and manufacture the equipment and the Developing Countries were able to improve living conditions and their economy. France began it’s path to excellent nuclear power generation starting with President Eisenhower’s “Atoms for Peace” initiative and the exporting of “Westinghouse Pressurized Water Reactor Nuclear Power Plants” Then, France went on to build their own.

So, China is now replacing America in the global arena of lifting poor countries out of poverty. Why? For now, read the absurd World Bank Policy on lending for new power plants:

The statement below in green font is from the “World Bank” web page:

Energy is at the heart of development.  Energy makes possible the investments, innovations and new industries that are the engines of jobs, inclusive growth and shared prosperity for entire economies. Universal access to affordable, reliable and sustainable and modern energy – Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 7 — is essential to reach other SDGs and is at the center of efforts to tackle climate change. The World Bank is committed to helping countries reach SDG7, which is central to delivering on the World Bank’s primary mandate: ending poverty and boosting shared prosperity. 

Today, 789 million people live without electricity and hundreds of millions more live with insufficient or unreliable access to it.  Nearly 3 billion people cook or heat their homes with polluting fuels like wood or other biomass, resulting in indoor and outdoor air pollution that cause widespread health impacts.

While the gaps are daunting, significant progress is being made in many areas. The global energy landscape is witnessing a major transformation and renewable energy is playing an increasingly vital role in helping countries develop modern, secure energy systems.  Lower costs for clean energy are helping with this transition, while disruptive technologies like smart grids, smart meters and geospatial data systems have upturned energy planning.

New large-scale approaches that combine grid and off-grid electrification have also contributed to impressive gains in energy access in many countries. In others, mini-grids are showing promise in closing the access gap.  At the same time, solar home systems are increasing in efficiency as they decrease in cost – making them affordable in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa, which are regions that account for the most significant gaps in energy access. 

World Bank website Jan. 29, 2021: https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/energy/overview

China is building thousands of coal plants around the world. Yes, meanwhile, while Biden’s Administration, Democrat Governors and Congress wage their war on carbon, China is helping to lift many countries of the world out of Energy Poverty. “Power Engineering International” magazine has estimated that 2,500 new coal plants will be built in Africa over the next ten years. China already produces over 50% of the world’s steel. Much of that steel production will be used to produce boiler tubing, piping, structural steel and state of the art steam turbines and generators. Not up to US Standards for now, but they are going to get a lot of practice. Meanwhile, America struggles to keep our share of Global manufacturing capacity. China has surpassed our manufacturing capacity. The war on carbon harms poor people struggling to improve their living conditions, it harms American workers and the War on Carbon fuels the rise of China.

That is why I have always advocated Common Sense Energy Policies that include ALL FORMS OF POWER GENERATION are important. Including solar and wind when practical. Let us not forget the 88% that we depend on now.

Dick Storm

Power Engineering International (PEI) Fossil Fuels bring Hope to Africa: https://www.powerengineeringint.com/world-regions/africa/fossil-fuels-to-dominate-africas-energy-mix-this-decade-report/

Japan Times: China Alone in Funding New Coal Plants in Africa:

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/05/07/asia-pacific/china-alone-africa-dirty-coal/

Sumitomo Mitsui and Mizuho to end lending for new coal-fired plants

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/04/16/business/smfg-mizuho-end-lending-coal-plants/

Chinese cash funds African coal plant building despite environmental concerns: South China Morning Post

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3110554/chinese-cash-funds-african-coal-plant-building-despite