New Modern Coal Plants are Needed for Energy Security, Grid Reliability, Affordable Electricity Generation and Without Pollution, so let me explain some of the details of the equipment used to clean the flue gases and the progress made in cleaning the air since 1970
Short History of Air Pollution Control
The EPA was started in 1970, for good reasons of cleaning the air and water. Coal plants built before 1970 had no controls on sulfur emissions and particulate collection was only between 75 and 90%. Today nearly all of the sulfur and particulates are collected. I have been a strong critic of the EPA since the “War on Coal” began during the Clinton administration with the beginning of weaponization of government rules such as “New Source Review”. However, in 1970, the EPA was needed to clean our air and water.
Shortly after promulgation of the EPA the major air pollutants were identified that needed controls. These pollutants are sulfur, particulates, VOCs (volatile organic compounds), carbon monoxide, lead, oxides of nitrogen and ozone. Since 1970 the EPA has measured and reported the progress of cleaning the air and this progress of controlling the true pollutants is shown on the chart below.
Notice the increases since 1970 in population, GDP, energy use and miles driven. These all trended up, whereas the pollutants trended down 78%. This is a story that needs to be told.
We Figured Out How to Make Coal Plants Clean and Then the EPA was Politicized & Weaponized to Kill Them
The perfection of advanced flue gas cleanup occurred about the same time that the EPA became a political weapon. In other words, the air pollution industry succeeded in cleaning all of the harmful pollutants out of the flue gas stream just as the Obama administration declared CO2 a pollutant, which it is not.
This attempt to kill reliable, affordable, Dispatchable and on-site energy storable coal power has been very effective. Over half of the coal power plants in America have been shut down while the largest fuel source for power generation in the rest of the world is still coal and the coal use continues to rise.
Clean Coal Combustion in a Pulverized Coal Power Plant
Most of the coal power plants in the world use the pulverized coal firing method. I described the Zimmer coal plant in a previous article. “The Magnificent Heat Engines that Society Depends On”.
There are other forms of coal power including CFBs (Circulating Fluidized Beds), IGCC (Integrated Gasification, Combined Cycle), stoker firing and cyclone firing. PC Firing (Pulverized Coal) is the most common method used and that is what I will discuss with regard to the exhaust gas (flue gas) cleanup systems. Here is a typical schematic flow diagram of a PC steam generator and the flue gas flow path to the stack.
This schematic is from the Duke Energy Rogers Energy Center plant overview:
The flue gas cleanup equipment in the schematic is shown to approximate scale. The power generation equipment is dwarfed by the size of the flue gas cleanup systems. So is the number of employees required to maintain the chemical processes at the backend larger than those needed to operate and maintain the power generation equipment. Yes, the flue gas cleanup systems are expensive, but once built, the electricity production costs are mostly fuel. Thus, as natural gas prices rise, such as with the Middle East crisis, coal mined in America can be used competitively for power generation less expensively than natural gas fuel for power generation. All of the economic and operational advantages of coal power without pollution.
How the Pollutants are Controlled
Lets take a look at the pollutants one at a time and take a look at how they are lessened or removed from the flue gas stream.
Sulfur Removal
Sulfur emissions were the main cause of acid rain and large coal power plants were the single largest source of atmospheric sulfur emissions. Corrections began with the invention and deployment of FGD (Flue Gas Desulfurization) systems about 1978. Since 1978 the efficacy of FGD systems have advanced. Here below is a schematic of a wet scrubber which utilizes a limestone slurry to capture the oxides of sulfur into a calcium oxide slurry to create calcium sulfate, aka gypsum. The waste calcium sulfate is often utilized for fertilizer and for manufacturing wall board as a byproduct.
More commonly used in the most modern coal plants for sulfur removal is Spray Dryer Absorbers. These collect the sulfur in small droplets of limestone slurry which is then transported in the gas stream to a Baghouse. The ash + limestone is collected on the surface of fabric filter bags and collected in hoppers beneath.
Particulates Removal
The equipment to collect particulates are Fabric Filter Baghouses. These have certain advantages, especially when used with SDAs (Spray Dryer Absorbers) because of the moist nature of the collected flyash, sulfur and lime slurry can continue to react with oxides of sulfur in the filter cake. Here is an illustration of a Baghouse, followed by a photo of an actual Fabric Filter Baghouse installed on a 650 MW coal plant.
The operating principle of a Fabric Filter Baghouse is basically the same as a home vacuum cleaner, where the dust is collected in a filter cake on the fabric surface. The filter cake then breaks up and falls by gravity to the hoppers below where it is then pneumatically removed and transported to ash storage.
Oxides of Nitrogen
Combustion of coal creates oxides of nitrogen from both the nitrogen in ambient air and from the nitrogen that is trapped in the coal fuel. If uncontrolled the NOx (an expression used to refer to all oxides of nitrogen) can contribute to ground level ozone, smog, acid rain and deterioration of visibility from photochemical smog. Therefore, oxides of nitrogen are drastically controlled to very low levels through a combination of modern low NOx combustion systems applied to the furnace. Then also by use of post-combustion SCRs (Selective Catalytic Reactors). The following two figures illustrate modern approaches to NOx controls.
First, Furnace solutions are low NOx burners combined with over-fire air systems to stage combustion.
Then, post combustion, SCRs (Selective Catalytic Reactors) are used to remove most of the remaining oxides of nitrogen. An illustration of an SCR is shown below.
The catalyst inside the SCR is reactive honeycomb ceramic as shown below.
Removal of Heavy Metals including Mercury
There are trace amounts of heavy metals in coal ash such as arsenic and mercury, Most of these are removed with the FGD (Flue Gas Desulfurization) system. Sometimes, if the mercury is above limits activated carbon injection is utilized to absorb and collect the mercury.
The Integrated Emissions Control System
The systems described above work together to collect or control the ash particulates, sulfur, NOx and mercury. One version of an integrated emissions control systems is shown below.
Stack Emissions are Harmless Water Vapor and CO2
The stack plumes are mentioned by those critical of coal power because they are so visible from far away. The fact is that the stack plumes are harmless water vapor, CO2 , nitrogen and oxygen not that much different than the exhaled breath of a human. Dr. William Happer gave a presentation a few years ago using that very example. Dr. Happer’s presentation is here.
Summary
Back in 1970 the boiler island comprised a steam generator and the fuel burning equipment. Minimum backend flue gas cleanup equipment was installed. There was no treatment of oxides of sulfur. Since 1970 the flue gas cleanup systems have advanced to huge chemical processing plants that require more manpower, maintenance and attention than the “Power Block” including the power generation equipment, steam generator, steam turbine and auxiliaries. The result is shown on the first chart above which shows the progress since 1970 in cleaning our air. The equipment for removal of harmful pollutants has been invented, perfected, installed, proven and continues to be commercially available. Another example is the John Turk Plant in Arkansas. This was POWER Magazines “Plant of the Year” in 2013 and is shown below. This is from the B&W success stories. https://www.babcock.com/home/products/spray-dryer-absorber-sda
Conclusions
Coal has been wrongly demonized by NGOs, MSM, Entertainment, wealthy individuals and enemies of the U.S.
Politicians have been duped into believing the “Manmade Global Warming Narrative” and that shutting down coal plants will make a difference. It won’t.
Regulations and Laws have been wrongly applied to shut down coal plants and the coal industry
Many of America’s elected officials have implemented policies that are Self-Sabotaging the once most reliable electric Grid in the world
Utility executives are just as bad as the indoctrinated public and have chose to follow the “Easiest path” to Bulk Power Supply. That path is, install lots of unreliable solar and wind and then back it up with natural gas turbines. Why? Because generating Bulk Power from coal fuel is complicated, expensive and simply harder to do. It takes hard work to overcome public resistance, more capital and more employees. It is simply a lot easier to take the renewables + CCGT path rather than the path of least cost, most reliable generation. Call it hitting the “Easy Button” But it is NOT best for America!
The De-Regulation of electricity in the 1990’s has absolved most Electric Utilities of Accountability to construct the needed Dispatchable electricity generation capacity. Before De-Regulation each Regional Utility planned for growth to match needed Demand with available and affordable generation capacity.
It costs much more Capital to “Burn Coal than to Mine it”
The general public Energy IQ is very low. So is the Energy IQ of most politicians.
The possibility of unreliable electric service is possible due to decades of public indoctrination
The largest need today in Energy and Electricity Generation is better energy education of the public
American Coal Ash Association used U.S. Geological Survey data to compare the levels of heavy metals in coal ash to the levels present in ordinary rocks and soil. The study showed the levels to be comparable — which shouldn’t surprise anyone because that’s what coal ash is: “the non-combustible mineral portion of coal.” It’s the dirt and rock that were mixed in with the coal. There’s nothing about burning it that causes more to appear. The study can be found here: https://acaa-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/free-publications/ACAA_CoalAshMaterialSafety_June2012.pdf
Other scientific studies of note: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency conducted risk analysis of the use of various coal combustion products in concrete, wallboard, and agriculture and found them all to be safe:https://acaa-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/ccr_bu_eval.pdf
Other scientific studies of note: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency conducted risk analysis of the use of various coal combustion products in concrete, wallboard, and agriculture and found them all to be safe: https://acaa-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/ccr_bu_eval.pdf
If it was simply the laws of Physics, Economics and Global Experiences of which source of Bulk Power was Best; then coal power plants would be on order by the hundreds. How can we fix the poor perceptions of coal power? Here are my thoughts.
Energy Powers Life as We Know It
America runs on energy. Energy is the Lifeblood of our economy and it is far more important than the MSM or public education teaches or explains. America has used right at 100 Quadrillion BTUs of primary energy each year for the last 25 years. Let me state this a different way, the total PRIMARY Energy used by the U.S. annually is about 100 quadrillion BTUs. Pro-rated, this is about 300 million BTUs for each U.S. citizen per year. I attempted to explain the use of about 300 million BTUs of energy per capita, each year by Americans here. The disconnect between perceptions and reality is, I think, a lack of understanding of basic physics and basic electricity generation economics. No one is an expert in everything and I freely acknowledge that there is much I do not understand about a lot of subjects. One reason such a large percentage of the public (and policymakers) became hoodwinked on renewables was, in my opinion, they were indoctrinated by green energy zealots that thought they knew a lot about solar and wind, but these zealots did not know as much about the energy and electric power business as they thought they did. Then these renewables advocates, with little understanding of bulk power generation, became influencers of elected officials who also did not understand. Thus, the blind led the blind into setting the Net Zero trap with high expectations from wind and solar. The result has been the self sabotaging of our reliable Grid. Many people I talk to, think they know a lot about power generation. Why? Because they have been indoctrinated with wind and solar propaganda. So, now we have a huge amount of the population, not only in the U.S. but all across the west, including the UK, EU, Australia and more. Many elected officials still believe that wind, solar and batteries can provide the electricity to compete with the world and still power our comfortable lives.
Energy Awareness, Thanks to the Iranians
The Iran war and closed Strait of Hormuz has helped create energy awareness with the general public. The last shock like this to ignite public interest, at least in my lifetime, to demonstrate the importance of energy in their lives was the 1973 Arab Oil Embargo. An unexpected benefit of the Iran War is that the public is forced to gain a better understanding of the availability and reliability of the conventional fuels: gasoline, Diesel, Jet fuel, natural gas, coal and nuclear. These six forms of primary energy provide over 90% of the energy we need and use.
Keep in Mind, April is a Low Electricity Demand Month
If this was winter and the world demand for LNG soared, then U.S. natural gas prices would (LNG Demand will likely exceed supply in the winter) escalate to peaks of over $10/million BTU. Fortunately, April is a low electricity demand season. Winter will come and I predict much higher than expected natural gas prices due to the world demand for LNG. Just as a reminder, the graph below shows natural gas spot market prices compared to coal prices, from 1980 to 2024.
Coal Power and Public Perceptions
I advocate for coal because that is the fuel that I know and understand, having worked for five decades in the design, construction, startup, testing, operations, maintenance, upgrade modifications, tuning for efficiency and applying low NOx solutions to coal plants. I also advocate for natural gas and nuclear power because I believe a Balanced generation portfolio is best for the U.S.A. and each fuel has its advantages. Here is a slide from a recent presentation showing my preferred Bulk Power Generation portfolio.
In my effort to help increase energy awareness of the public, I have recently been involved in presentations to two Lifelong Learning groups, both local here in the Hilton Head Island area. For the most part, it is rewarding to share my knowledge and experiences and I have been involved with about five courses at USCB-OLLI and in addition, have given presentations to a number of civic clubs. I really appreciate the feedback from surveys that show the candid comments of the participants. Some people are very gracious and appreciative for the instructors efforts, and as an instructor, I appreciate the kind words. However, as all of us who have worked in the real world of conventional energy and electricity generation, we know that many of the public have been indoctrinated to believe that wind and solar are good, and coal (all fossil fuels for that matter) is bad. Period. This is the divided society that we live in and I wish I knew how to change it. What follows are some suggestions to help improve the average Energy IQ of voters.
Some of the Public Understand Energy and Electricity Generation, Most Do Not
My estimate of those who understand the true facts on energy and electricity generation is 5%. That is one person in twenty. Why do I say this? Because for the last twenty years I have been active in public advocacy for common sense energy policies by preparing paid ads in newspapers, presenting paid radio “Energy Fact Minutes”, presented dozens of presentations to civic clubs, taught courses at colleges and discussed with many people whom I had never met before. Thus my low estimate of 5%, although statistically unscientific, this is based on personal contact with thousands of people over the last two decades. I have confidence that it is close to being realistic.
Let’s assume that I am correct that one in twenty understands energy and that we are going to educate the other 95% on energy and electricity generation. What would be a reasonable approach? Here are three suggestions.
A Path to Better Energy & Environmental Education
I suggest a three step program to improve the public’s understanding of energy, electricity generation and the environment:
1. Electric Utilities to Replicate the 1926-1973 “Reddy Kilowatt” Program to Teach the Fundamentals of Energy and Electricity Generation
Readers born before about 1955 will remember Reddy Kilowatt, the mascot of the Investor Owned Utilities advertising campaign which began about 1926 and lasted (ironically) up to about the first Arab Oil Embargo in 1973.
Reddy Kilowatt was used to teach the basics of “Living Better Electrically”. It was also part of a magazine advertising campaign in 1950. Here is an ad by B&W which manufactured about 40% of the steam generators used by the electric utilities and the U.S. Navy. B&W has a long history of steam generator manufacturing in the U.S. since 1867, providing steam generators to Thomas Edison and George Westinghouse and then growing to be a Fortune 500 company in the 1950’s and 1960’s.
(B&W Fortune 500- #141 in 1957)
That theme of “Living Better Electrically” caught on well and none other than the Great Communicator himself was the spokesperson for General Electric on the Sunday night TV show, the General Electric Theater, 1953-1962. Ronald Reagan plugged G-E appliances but the advertising message included power generation.
Back in the early 1970’s I personally, as a CP&L startup engineer had many interactions with G-E’s Power Generation Division and they enjoyed wide public acceptance, everyone knew what G-E did to improve our quality of life and including building high quality steam turbines and generators.
I recommend that President Trump provide an incentive for all Utilities and large power generation equipment corporations to become involved with educating the public on the true facts on energy and electric power generation. Like the EEI and many municipal utilities did up to about 1974 using the “Live Better Electrically Theme” with Reddy Kilowatt as the mascot. Perhaps a new tag line, new mascot, but a replication of the public education on energy is what I am proposing.
2. Government Printing of Factual Textbooks on Energy, Electricity Generation and the Environment
The EPA and the Department of Energy, TVA, ORNL, LLNL and other government organizations together have tens of thousands of employees. This talent bank could be used to create and in some cases, simply update literature that can be reused for High Schools and Colleges to teach the true facts on energy, electricity, the environment and energy economics. The fundamentals written and illustrated in books, pamphlets and other published information on the generation of electricity by coal, gas and nuclear has not changed. Therefore, updating is all that is needed. Thermodynamics, chemistry and fluid mechanics are still the same. The few changes are higher pressures and temperatures, advanced alloys and the addition of enormously complicated Flue Gas Cleanup systems that have made clean coal, clean.
3. Encourage K-12 and University Teachers/Professors to teach the true factual physics, economics, chemistry and environmental science
Much of the existing textbooks and culture is basically biased against fossil fuels. As mentioned above with the reference to Reddy Kilowatt, back in the 1960’s, chemistry, physics, general science and environmental science was taught based on factual science. We need to return to teaching unbiased science courses to all students. Enormous amounts of literature that is factual and teaches the true laws of physics exist in the private sector. Here are some examples to help the average person (whether a High School student or an adult) understand the importance of affordable, reliable and environmentally acceptable energy:
Dr. Lars Schernikau’s website, “Unpopular Truths” which has numerous factual articles on energy and electricity generation: https://unpopular-truth.com/blog/
All of us that understand energy and electricity generation should do our part to help the other 95% of the population to understand the true facts and “How the World Really Works”, by the way, Vaclav Smil published an excellent book by that title.
I would add this and Smil’s other books to the required reading for anyone who is involved in creating energy policy, or anyone who really does want to learn “How the World Really Works”. Energy is the Lifeblood of all that we cherish, it is my hope that the public will learn more and respect the sources of energy that power our lives.
Yours truly,
Dick Storm, April 23, 2026
References and Including Documents that address CO2 and Control of Exhaust Emissions from coal power plants
For my friends that asked, “Why didn’t you discuss more of the environmental impacts of coal power, well, here is a lot of reading if you are sincerely interested in learning more.
Other scientific studies of note: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency conducted risk analysis of the use of various coal combustion products in concrete, wallboard, and agriculture and found them all to be safe: https://acaa-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/ccr_bu_eval.pdf
The S.C. Legislature had two choices: 1. Keep Electricity prices reasonable to keep low electricity costs for citizens plus, attract more industry or 2. Transition to Solar, Wind, Batteries, Natural Gas and create significantly higher electric bills. They chose option 2. just as most U.S. Blue states did…
The experiences of most countries and U.S. states that have “transitioned” to renewable energy has caused electricity prices to sharply rise and caused de-industrialization. Yet, the U.S. policymakers continue the “War on Coal”by implementing harmful Net-Zero Carbon policies. The Green New Deal/Inflation Reduction Act policy momentum continues into 2026. Investments in new electricity generation for fiscal year 2026, according to the EIA is still over 90% renewables. That’s right, not one Dispatchable or Base Load coal or nuclear plant is planned for construction in 2026, according to the EIA as of January 2026.
South Carolina although believed to be a very Conservative state, the energy policy is just as Blue as California or Massachusetts. The South Carolina law (S.C. Code Ann. §58-37-40) directs the retirement of coal-fired generation:
Part 1 of this article covered Winter Storm Fern and the importance of coal to provide over 80% of the low country’s electricity production.
Let’s move forward to future planning for increasing generation to meet the growing Demand. Here below is the narrowly focused basis of low CO2 generation planning by Santee-Cooper (aka South Carolina Public Service Authority) updated IRP. As you can see, the primary driver of the type of new generation capacity is CO2 Emissions. Not Grid reliability, affordability, Dispatchability or industrial economics. This is in opposition to the Trump energy agenda and policy to exit the anti-American Paris Agreement and to repeal the CO2 Endangerment Finding and keep America strong. President Trump has done his part, our state, like many blue states and Deep State Bureaucrats, is continuing to trod down the destructive regulatory path of Net-Zero Carbon.
My Letter to S.C. Senator Davis, April 2025
I wrote to S.C. Senator Davis as a response to his Press Release asking for public comments. Here are some excerpts from my letter to Senator Davis:
“Electric Power Grids that have a high percentage of wind and solar must be backed up with fast start natural gas turbines or reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE). Because the cost component of the fuel used is up to 90% of the electricity production cost, then the electricity cost is as volatile as the fuel cost. Natural gas is a clean and abundant fuel. However, the cost of natural gas can vary from $2.00 per million BTU to $5.00 per million BTU. When the fuel cost varies, so does the electricity production cost. Sometimes doubling. The state electric rates of California, MA, CT and Hawaii are examples of extreme switches to renewables with natural gas or oil backup. Here are two slides used in presentations by me and other electricity generation experts during 2024. The ten highest cost states and ten lowest cost states are instructive when the sources of primary energy for electricity generation is considered. My blog referenced below has more references.”
This letter was written last year, well before the Iranian conflict began. Gas prices are likely to become more volatile and mostly higher when summer electricity Demand begins and of course, a lot higher next December.
“Repeal the S.C. Restrictions on Greenhouse Gases. The EPA Law referenced in the Santee-Cooper IRP and also applying to Dominion Energy and Duke, is flawed and in the process of properly being nullified by the new EPA Administrator. The shutting down of coal plants is the main reason why electric rates will increase, and Demand Response (Rationing) measures will need to be implemented.” (1. Below-From Santee-Cooper IRP)
“Maintain, Improve and Expand coal power generation in S.C. The lowest production cost electricity in S.C. is from the coal plants at the following plants: Cross, Cope, Winyah, Williams and Wateree Generating Stations. The 600 MW Pee Dee Coal Plant that was planned to be built about 2010 should be constructed ASAP. The existing coal plants should be authorized to perform all required maintenance to keep in first class operating condition until such time that new nuclear capacity is put on line. “
“Build sufficient new coal generating capacity at the Santee-Cooper (South Carolina Public Service Authority) with the same Balanced Generation Portfolio of coal, nuclear and gas as has been the practice for over 80 years of reliable and affordable electricity production by Santee-Cooper. Santee-Cooper is the primary supplier of electricity to Palmetto Electric and the generation assets are over 60% coal fueled.”
“Stop the building of more non-Dispatchable solar and wind power generation systems. Stop subsidies and incentives for Solar, Wind and Battery Storage Systems (BESS). Why? Because shutting down of reliable, dispatchable, affordable coal plants has been done by these other states and the electricity costs are the highest in our country. California, Massachusetts, Hawaii, Connecticut and Rhode Island. (2. EIA list of U.S. Electric Rates by state)Also, the high cost, non-competitive electricity experiences of Germany, Scandinavia and the UK are instructive. (3.) “
Included in the letter to Senator Davis was a couple charts, including this one of the renewable premium paid in electricity costs in various countries of the world.
I have written an article on my blog which outlines the good results of coal plants (such as Santee-Cooper’s excellent record of 80 years) and the references to other states and countries that have abandoned coal fuel. The blog post is here.
As of this writing, the S.C. Legislature has not budged from the the Net Zero path to increased electricity costs and less reliability.
Conclusion: S.C. is Planning for Electricity Price Rises and Less Grid Reliability
The previous blog posts showed many details of Palmetto Electric’s Bulk Power Supply, from Santee-Cooper. Here, here, here, here and here.
By planning for Net Zero Carbon, South Carolina is planning for higher electricity costs in lieu of building new coal plants to preserve our position as one of the states with the most Industry and consumer friendly low electric rates.
Additional references are listed below to show the clear rise in electric rates as more dependence on variable generation and battery storage. Another consideration is resistance to fuel interruptions during times of war, such as we have now. Coal power generation has the inherent advantage of storing weeks or months of primary energy in a coal pile on site.
Yours truly,
Dick Storm, March 17, 2026
References and information for further reading and research
Perhaps some day a Documentary will be made to summarize how Coal was Demonized by NGOs, government, WEF, MSM, Entertainment, Dark Money, and Environmental Extremists just as nuclear power was during the 1970 and 1980’s? Here is “Pandora’s Promise”, 2013 Movie to Expose the Facts about Nuclear Power and how it was wrongly Demonized, causing the collapse of the nuclear Supply-Chain. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMutoR8YTlQ
Coal fuel should be included in the future electricity generation portfolio based on the laws of physics, available forms of primary energy, proven economics of electric power generation and the proven track record of coal power for providing reliable, dispatchable and affordable electricity generation. The CO2 Coalition’s Angela Wheeler interviewed me for the CO2 Coalitions Podcast, “Climate De-Brief” and here are my views of the absurd anti-American energy policies, many of which are still strangling President Trump’s path to restoring America’s Greatness. Energy is, in fact, The LifeBlood of Our Economy.
This article will attempt to show some of the reasons why based on the merits of coal why it should be increased as in the portfolio of reliable sources of primary energy. Speaking of BTUs, I would like to start with describing the potential sources of the primary energy America needs and is using now to supply 100 quadrillion BTUs of primary energy.
Back to Basics: Let’s Look at the Available Sources of Primary Energy
From a primary energy viewpoint, America has used right at 100 quadrillion BTUs of energy each year since about the year 2000.
This includes all forms of energy including oil, gas, coal, nuclear and renewables. As more AI Data Centers are built, more manufacturing is reshored, more EVs placed on the highways and greater electrification is transitioned across the economy, the demand for total primary energy is expected to increase. Coal is the most practical, achievable and available addition to provide 10-30 quadrillion BTUs more per annum of growing primary energy supply. Do you remember the phrase from a couple years ago, “Electrify Everything”? Let’s get back to the basics of Primary energy and then look at the incredibly huge contribution of conventional fuels. Also, the diminutive contribution of wind and solar.
Conventional forms of energy, that is those forms of energy we have depended on for the last hundred years, still provide well over 90% of the Primary energy that we need for our economy to thrive and to power our lives.
The Enormity of 100 Quadrillion BTUs
The statistics of energy use, fuel sources, electricity generation, plant efficiencies and much more are well understood by people who read this. However, outside of our energy professional’s network there are millions of Americans that have low energy IQ’s. Some of the low energy IQ individuals create national energy policy. As a result of indoctrination by renewable energy proponents many Americans believe that wind and solar can replace coal, gas and yes, even nuclear.
The public in general, has a very weak understanding of the generation of electricity and how it is managed. Therefore, I thought I would describe in understandable terms; primary energy, electricity and the enormity of 100 Quadrillion BTUs. Perhaps this will reach people and politicians that are otherwise unaware of the magnitude of the primary energy supplied by conventional forms of energy which we absolutely need to power our lives.
Reliable, Dispatchable and affordable Electric power generation is the Life-Blood of any country’s economy. The source of most of the electric power generation for most of the industrialized world since the Industrial Revolution has been Thermal Power generation. Even in the western countries that have attempted to transition to carbon free sources of electric power generation, thermal power continues to dominate. For the year 2024 about 76% of the electric power production was from thermal power. The primary energy of over 90 quadrillion BTUs was provided by coal, gas, nuclear, oil and Biomass.
One of the advantages of Thermal generation is just about all forms of Thermal power are dispatchable on demand. Gas turbines and Reciprocating gas engines obviously respond faster than a pulverized coal or nuclear unit, but most of the thermal power plants are in fact, dispatchable.
The demand for electricity is growing. The quantity of growth in the future in debatable however, most experts agree, electricity demand is growing and U.S. growth may require as much as 100 GW of new generation by 2030 and 800 GW of new generation by 2040. Limited battery backup is available for intermittent renewables. Proven sources of dependable, affordable and dispatchable power are needed for grid reliability.
Gas fuel provides 43% of America’s electric power generation. Nuclear is now accepted by almost everyone. However, deploying 100 GW of new nuclear power generation by 2030 is unrealistic, given the record of permitting and construction times from recent new nuclear power plants such as Vogtle 3 and 4 which took about 10 years to build. In the U.S. nuclear power provided about 808 TWh of electricity out of about 4200 TWh total or about 19%. This is commendable, however, most of the U.S. nuclear plants were built decades ago and are an average age of about 42.
Think about the need of 100 GW of new power generation by 2030. If the growth in supply was all nuclear, 100 GW would be equivalent to completing 45 new nuclear units the size of Vogtle units #3 & 4 in four years, if started today.
Included in the heading “Conventional Energy” is Hydro. Why? Because it is important, it is dispatchable and it has been around for well over 100 years. Therefore, in my view, it qualifies as being conventional. When hydropower is included with thermal power, the total Primary Energy from conventional sources exceeds 90%.
This is the primary energy that generates electricity, provides ground and air transportation, commercial & Residential heating, cooling, cooking and very importantly, industrial production. Electricity generation consumes between 33 to 40% of the world’s total primary energy.
Electrify everything was the buzz phrase of a few years ago. Let’s look at the enormity of replacing the conventional fuels we all depend on now.
Thermal electric power generation dominates U.S. electricity generation. Gas fuel has taken the lead from coal since about 2010. The total Thermal power generation in the U.S. in 2024 was about 76% Thermal generation.
The Enormity of BTUs Measured in Quadrillions
About 43% of America’s electricity was generated from pipeline supplied natural gas in 2025. It is hard to visualize 33 Quadrillion BTUs of methane, so I thought showing huge LNG tanker ships might be a way to describe the challenge of increasing America’s total Primary energy consumption from the current @ 100 Quads to the range of 120 Quads by 2050.
How About Coal?
In the year 2008 America consumed about 20 Quadrillion BTUs of coal generated electricity. Since then natural gas use has overtaken coal’s #1 position and coal in 2025 generated about 16% of America’s electricity and consumed about 10 Quadrillion BTUs. Coal has been demonized by many and is not perceived by the public to be the Treasure of American energy that I believe it is.
However, from the standpoints of physics, economics, proven track record, dispatchability, energy storage and reliability….Coal is an important fuel for the next twenty or thirty years. Here are thirteen advantages of coal as a source of primary energy for electricity generation:
Coal Power is Proven Here and Now
Energy Density
Reliable
Affordable and has the best record of low cost electricity production over the long term
On-Site Fuel Storage for months
Dispatchable
Coal Plants are Robust and have a long life when properly maintained
The Manufacturing Supply-Chain is Established
America is the Saudi Arabia of Coal and has hundreds of year supply
Operations and Maintenance Training and Protocols are Established
Manufacturers, EPRI and Training companies all have an established library of Best O&M practices
Flyash/Bottom Ash Use as Concrete Additive for Strength and resistance to spalling, FGD sludge byproduct used for sheetrock and also a source of Rare Earth Minerals
Modern Coal Plants are cleanand the emissions of major pollutants have been corrected with backend pollution control equipment. The six main pollutants have been reduced since 1970 in spite of increases in GDP, Population, auto miles driven and greater use of energy in all forms. The EPA chart below shows the progress achieved.
Conclusions
Wind and Solar are the Highest Cost Power and Cannot Meet Demand
More Dispatchable Bulk Power Plants Need to be Built
Coal, Gas and Nuclear Plants provide the lowest cost, most reliable Power
States and Countries on Path to Net-Zero Carbon are Paying a high price
Natural Gas Prices will likely rise in the future
Electricity prices will rise with fuel cost as well as from inflation of components and construction costs.
Production prices of electricity will follow fuel cost
A Balanced Generation portfolio is Beneficial as a Hedge Against Fuel Cost Volatility
America should learn from the experiences of Germany, CA, Hawaii, CT, MA, ME, NH, NJ and other states with high electricity costs
States and countries that have shut down coal plants have experienced increased electricity production costs. This is not a forecast, this is fact
Building new clean coal plants are needed to continue America’s excellent record of providing reliable electricity at affordable costs.
Coal is the default fuel to increase America’s Primary energy supply beyond 120 Quadrillion BTUs in the next decade
Part ll will cover electric power generation in the rest of the world and some of the advances of clean coal power generation.
Here is an absolutely nutty proposal, replace a reliable 2700 MW coal plant, (the Sherco Coal Plant) with solar panels. This is Minnesota where it gets very cold and also is known for heavy snowfall in the winter…, CNN report: https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/16/climate/coal-to-solar-minnesota
Anti-American, pro-CCP energy policies are not limited to Blue states. We expect foolish energy policies from California, Hawaii, Massachussetts, CT, ME and NY but not so much in “Red States” like South Carolina. S.C. is one of the most Conservative states in the U.S. However the S.C. political leaders have drank the “Green Kool Aid” and continue to permit and depend on solar with battery backup to be promoted to replace the reliable and affordable coal generation in our state.
A chart of investment in renewables supports the comments of Dave Walsh. Over 91% of the new generation installed in the U.S. in 2024 was renewables. This is also corroborated on the Global Energy Monitor website.
Mark Lewis on LinkedIn has also posted a summary of the persistent building of tax subsidized, parasitic and high electricity rate driving solar and wind. Mark’s post is here. A screen shot of the ENVERUS chart is copied below. This is from Ian Nieboer Substack article. Thank you Ian. As can be seen, the subsidies for wind, solar and battery storage continue well past 2030. In my opinion and observations, the subsidies for wind and solar are the root cause of increasing electric rates nationwide and a trend toward reduced reliability as well.
Back to my Red state of S.C. SenatorTom Davis, Governor McMaster and the SC Legislature still have coal plant shutdowns planned for Santee-Cooper. Here is an excerpt of the Press Release on “All of the Above EnergyPolicy” by Senator Davis:
These coal plants have a stellar record of keeping electricity prices and reliability amongst the best in the world. Tom Davis’ Press Release after the Governor signed the SC Energy Bill implied: “We consider all forms of energy, renewables, gas and nuclear”. I emailed Davis to remind him that over 40% of Palmetto Electric’s Bulk Power is from coal and that it is the lowest cost fuel. Davis got right back to me and said, “We won’t shut coal plants down until a better source is found”….This is Not reassuring because, starving an operating plant of required maintenance $$ will simply cause it to become an unreliable and higher cost asset…then, predictably, the improperly maintained equipment wear and tear will lead to a self inflicted decay and unreliability. After the deterioration, this will lead to a then obvious decision to replace the coal plants with higher production cost gas plants. This happened at the once magnificent McIntosh Unit #3 at the City of Lakeland in Florida. I know because I worked many years for the City of Lakeland as a contractor and/or consultant, including the startup and tuning of McIntosh #3 and many maintenance efforts 1982-2012.
Reminder, the generation cost component to produce electricity, for a gas plant is about 90% fuel cost. Therefore, if the gas price doubles, so does the production cost of electricity. Let that sink in. The gas fueled RICE (Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines) will produce electricity at a cost that tracks natural gas prices.
Fast forward to next year and the U.S. exported LNG will likely increase domestic gas prices in the U.S. this winter and beyond. I support President Trump’s interest in exporting LNG but we should use more American coal for power generation here in the U.S. until new nuclear plants are built. In fact, more new coal plants should be built as well. I presented my thoughts and analysis of the importance of coal power at the Coal Institute in July. Coal is a more stable and economical fuel for Bulk Power generation.
Natural gas prices are not always low. Here is a 44 year history of gas prices compared to coal.
A minority of the folks in the U.S. population (Including Policymakers) understand the basics of energy and power generation. My estimate is less than 3%. Why? Utility generating plants became huge, highly automated and it only takes a crew of three operators to run a 600-1200 MW coal plant. Also, the 97% of the energy naive public has been bombarded with green indoctrination and lies about “Free solar and wind power”. Thus, the combination of high productivity of coal plants over the years has been done with a very small work force that has experience in power generation. Then, secondly, the successful demonization of coal by the MSM, Entertainment and well funded NGOs has led us to the point of a Self-Inflicted electricity generation crisis. ( Maybe not all Self Inflicted, some foreign actors were also involved)
Piling onto the madness of anti-American energy policies we have, Utility managers trained in accounting or law that have teamed up with similarly low Energy IQ politicians to create harmful, anti-American, Net-Zero Carbon Policies…These are so called “Energy Policies”. Why and how can these insane policies be put into place? Because the policy makers simply do not understand basic power generation fundamentals. Much of the western world has been following the same destructive Net-Zero Carbon path. Five examples are the UK, Germany, Spain, Australia and Denmark. They all have high power costs that are killing their once productive Industrial base. My adopted state of S.C. seems to be right there with the UK and Germany with regard to foolish “Green Energy Policies”.
Conclusions
Much of the Free Western World has been making the same mistakes on following a path to Net-Zero Carbon
It is my opinion that the path to Net-Zero Carbon was to reduce the productive capacity of the west and increase the dependence on manufactured products from China. Net-Zero Carbon policies are Not based on sound energy policies or for protection of the environment. At best they are to promote government control of our lives. At worst they are to weaken the western free world and therefore by default, increase the world influence of China.
Thankfully we have President Trump and Chris Wright to frame U.S. Energy Policy. However, the purpose of this article is to point out the fact that many states remain on paths to destroy reasonable cost, reliable electric power generation that supports industrial production and economic prosperity…
GRIDWATCH Australia Thank you Rafe Champion! “AT 6.30 PM eastern time THE WIND WAS CONTRIBUTING 13% OF DEMAND IN THE EAST AND 2.5% IN THE WEST OH DEAR!!” https://www.nem-watch.info/widgets/RenewEconomy/
Title of the prescient 2023 book by the late Mr. Donn Dears.
Mr. Dears wrote many books and several are listed in the references below. His last book, “Clean Energy Crisis” was written before the announcement of many Data Centers were to be built and would drastically increase the rate of electricity usage. Mr. Dears wrote much on the flaws and fiction of Net-Zero Carbon and dependence on electricity by carbon-free forms of power. In fact, his statements written in 2023 regarding “What would it take to replace Fossil Fuels” are listed below: Remember, this is before the advent of AI Data Centers.
Here is what Donn Dears calculated in power generation by 2050 from the combination of Wind, PV Solar, and Nuclear:
995,141 Wind turbines of 2.5 MW each
3,918,996 MW of PV Solar
881 new Nuclear Units like Georgia Power’s Plant Vogtle Units 3 & 4
In summary of this, Mr. Dears writes: ” It is not possible to generate all the electricity needed for electrification of the economy (including the replacement of ICE vehicles and BEV’s, and the replacement of natural gas for heating with electric heat pumps) by relying on wind, PV Solar, or nuclear power, whether alone or in combination”
Thank you Donn Dears, we miss your great engineering talent and visionary work. RIP my friend, your numerous published books, blog and voluminous published technical articles warned us. It is my hope that the state and Federal Bureaucrats who create laws and regulations, will read your books and all available publications.
The Importance of Coal Power
Previous articles by me and others have highlighted the importance of coal power. Especially during peak Demand in the winter. As this is written, it is May and the period between March and May, in the U.S.A. lower 48 has always been a period of low demand, due to the mild weather not requiring much heating or cooling. The crisis periods are peak summer, July-August and winter December-February. Coal has unique and proven benefits for power generation. Such as long term on-site storage.
Here are a dozen articles that cover the importance of coal power for electricity reliability, affordability, Dispatchability and National security.
Generation of the power required for our country to remain the #1 world economy and to sustain our high quality of life will require much more electricity generation capacity. The EIA, NEMA and IEA forecast that electricity demand by 2050 will increase by 50%. (In my opinion plus the opinions of Stephen Heins, Chris Wright, Thomas Shepstone and others… this is conservative considering AI Data centers and plans to reshore manufacturing)
Satisfying this Demand increase will need to come from conventional forms of proven Primary Energy. Those proven forms of primary energy for electricity generation are natural gas, nuclear, coal and hydro-electric.
A 50% increase in capacity will be about 600 GW of generation capacity from the current 1, 200 GW of installed capacity. The 50% increase is also reported by NEMA report. So what sources of power can supply this enormous amount of growth of electricity generation Demand?
Let’s be realistic. For reliable, Dispatchable power, 24/7 that generation must come from coal, gas or nuclear. Here is my take on this. For gas power production G-E has reported record sales and the shops are full till about 2030. They hope to produce about 54 GW of power production by 2030. Let’s say with facilities modernization and expansion by 2050 they can produce say 300 GW more. That gets us to about 350 GW by 2050. Yes, I know there are also other Gas Turbine manufacturers such as Mitsubishi and Siemens. But….in my view we are already too dependent on “Just in Time” pipeline supplied gas. America is now about 45% dependent on natural gas for electricity generation.
Nuclear is well proven and has provided about 20% of our electricity for decades. However, expansion takes time and the Supply-Chain needs to be rebuilt. Back to Donn Dears forecast of 881 new nuclear plants by 2050. We must remember it took Georgia Power about ten years to build the 2200 MW expansion at Plant Vogtle. So, nuclear should be included in the portfolio of new generation. However, the entire U.S. Fleet of about 94 operating nuclear units took about 30 years to design and construct. 1957-1987. The current operating nuclear plants represent 97 GW.
I know this is rough, back of the envelope estimating, but so are all forecasts.
So, if gas plants can provide say 350 GW of new capacity and new nuclear units another 200 GW (I may be optimistic on doubling existing fleet capacity, considering the age of existing plants and the fact that some will be retired by 2050). Where do we get the remaining 50+ GW of required electricity generation capacity? I predict much more than 50 GW of new coal or other Dispatchable power will be required before 2050 and we must absolutely consider the retirements of existing coal plants. According to the Washington Times article, over 117 coal plants are scheduled to be shut down by 2030.
My suggestion is build at least 125 GW of new coal plants. This is about the same capacity as has been shut down and demolished since Obama was President. It will not be easy to do so.
A large coal plant can be imploded with explosives in about ten seconds and reduced to a pile of rubble as Green supporters cheer. However, to build a magnificent, Dispatchable, Reliable, and Affordable 600 MW coal plant will take about five years after the permitting is completed.
My next article will be on the challenges of building 125 GW of new coal plants.
Dick Storm, May 2, 2025
References and for Further Research using respected and factual sources
Solar and Wind are not the lowest cost electricity generation, in spite of what is written or hyped
Electricity Demand is Growing at the Fastest Rate in a Decade
An excerpt from the latest IEA Energy 2025 report follows:
“Global energy demand grew by 2.2% in 2024 – faster than the averagerate over the past decade.Demand for all fuels and technologiesexpanded in 2024. The increase was led by the power sector as electricity demand surged by 4.3%, well above the 3.2% growth in global GDP, driven by record temperatures, electrification and digitalisation. Renewables accounted for most of the growth in global energy supply (38%), followed by natural gas (28%), coal (15%), oil (11%) and nuclear (8%)“
The National Mining Association provides the map below which shows the U.S. States with the lowest cost electricity and also the percentage of electricity generation from coal.
The NMA illustration above is based on electricity prices in 2023. A more recent listing is compiled by the EIA, here.
The previous article I wrote covered the sad cancellation of most of the 151 new coal plants that were planned in 2008. Also, the coal plants canceled between 2007 and 2015 are covered here,here and here.
Here below is a slide I used for my presentation to the 2011 ASME Summer Meeting in Dallas for my talk on the “Importance of Coal and America’s Treasure of Fossil Fuels” as of the summer of 2011. Note the electricity prices when coal provided over 40% of America’s electricity generation. The increases are NOT simply inflation. The price increases since 2010 are primarily the result of the “War on Coal”.
Also, moving from 2011 to present day power demand, the 2025 winter peak power generation from coal remains important. Here is a typical winter day generation. This one from January 21, 2025. Coal was providing over 20% of America’s electricity.
Reliable, Affordable Electricity Powers the U.S. Economy
The WSJ recently published an article, “Economic Growth Depends on Electricity, Not Oil”. The article is good with respect to showing the relationship of reliable, affordable power, but in my opinion has too much emphasis (again) on renewable green power as the solution. Here is the historical growth of electricity as reported in the WSJ.
Green Power Obfuscation
The question of which fuel or source provides the lowest cost generation of electricity? The answer to that question gets muddled by much obfuscation by the media and even professional trade journals that are well respected. Here is a typical example. This one from Visual Capitalist.
Here is another example of greenwashing from my local electricity supplier in South Carolina. Most of the generation for Palmetto-Electric Cooperative is provided by the primarily coal fueled Santee-Cooper generation. Yet, propaganda such as this tends to indoctrinate the public that renewables are powering Hilton Head island.
Here is a slide I used in a presentation several years ago where threee well respected organizations, WSJ, Palmetto Electric and the IEA all have obfuscated the facts on the cost of new generation capacity built or power produced during 2020.
Results Engineering
One of the positions I held over the years was that of Results Engineer for Babcock & Wilcox. I thought it was a corny title at the time (1967) but after many years, can appreciate the significance of measuring the true Results of Thermal Power Generating plants. The Results Engineering Team tested new power plants to measure efficiency and other performance parameters. Back then (as is done now) the total heat input is measured that is inputed to a power generation system and then the net output is determined as the Heat-Rate based on measuring the total heat input, and the equivalent energy output. A typical modern ultra-supercritical coal plant may achieve an efficiency of 41% at design conditions. This would be a Heat-Rate of 8,323 Btus/kWh. Back to basics: one kWh of electricity is equivalent to 3412.6 BTUs. Thus, 3412.6/8323 X 100=41% Thermal efficiency
Yes, I am aware that natural gas combined cycle plants (GTCC) can achieve up to 65% Thermal Efficiency. However, with the fuel cost component about 90% for natural gas fuel, the production cost is directly impacted by increased fuel costs. Even at a much higher efficiency, a 60% GTCC plant will have a higher production cost than a 40% efficient coal plant if the fuel is 2x more expensive. More on that later.
Why are Heat-Rate and Thermal Efficiency Important?
Few energy writers discuss the importance of Thermal Power in electricity generation (or transportation). For example, the January 21, 2025 electricity generation example shown above is provided by over 90% Thermal Power. Thermal energy converted to electricity from nuclear, natural gas and coal. The importance of PRIMARYEnergy is rarely written about. One energy expert, Lars Schernikau has written much on Primary energy. As a reminder for the U.S., here is the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Sankey Diagram of Total PRIMARY Energy Flows for 2022: Note that of the total Primary Energy used in the U.S. over 94% for the entire year 2022 was from conventional forms of electric power generation when old hydro, Biomass and nuclear are included. The 100 Quadrillion BTUs of total Primary energy includes all uses of energy; electricity generation, transportation, industrial production, heating, cooking and commercial end uses.
The primary cost of Electricity production at the Bus Bar of a thermal power plant is fuel. A coal plant production cost component will be in the range of 70% of electricity cost. The natural gas fuel cost component for a GTCC or simple cycle gas turbine will be about 90% of the production cost. Therefore, the cost of the primary energy determines the production cost of electricity. One of many advantages of coal plants is the fairly level cost of fuel over the years. Thus, stable electricity prices.
Thomas Troszak has written an excellent paper on the fallacy of wind and solar. It is entitled, “Why Do We Burn Coal and Wood to Make Solar Panels“? Lars Schernikau has an excellent web page entitled “Unpopular Truths” and he has published books on the importance of Primary Energy. Suffice it to say, Primary Energy needs to be discussed more at a level for the general public to understand. The absence of sound energy education which has been masked by public green indoctrination, is one reason why the importance of primary energy is, misunderstood by the public and policy makers.
But, I digress. Let’s get back to the Results of various sources of electricity generation and comparing the end Results of wind, solar and coal power generation. One of my all time favorite words: RESULTS!
RESULTS Matter! U.S. States with Lowest Cost Power and the Primary Fuel Used for Electricity Generation
The EIA lists the electricity costs for all 50 states. That list is here. Also, Electricity Plans.com, Here. Five with the lowest average retail rates (EIA) are:
North Dakota $0.0102/kWh
Idaho $0.10.97/kWh
Utah $0.1102/kWh
Wyoming $0.117/kWh
Nebraska $0.1078/kWh
Let’s dig into the principal fuel used for power generation by North Dakota according to the EIA Energy Profile for ND. The Primary source of energy for power generation is 54.4% coal and 39.7% renewables. The next lowest cost producer of electricity is Idaho. EIA Energy Profile for Idaho shows: Natural gas 68.7% and renewables 30.8%. Nebraska is another low cost producer, data from EIA Energy Profile for Nebraska is: 48% coal, 16.7% nuclear and 33.5% renewables. These three examples are what I would consider “Balanced Generation Portfolios”. The reason the power costs are reasonable has many moving parts but primarily the low electricity rates are attributed to low cost, affordable Primary energy. Idaho is blessed with wind and abundant hydropower from Bonneville Power dams in the Columbia River system. The hydropower supply in the Pacific Northwest is unique and obviously different than the geography of Florida or the plains states of the midwest. The Green New Deal plan of solar and wind powering all 50 states just simply will not and is not working. One policy does not fit all 50 states.
How about South Carolina?
My adopted state of S.C. ranks pretty well in electricity rates, for now. The S.C. EIA Energy profile shows our state electric costs at $0.01387/kWh. Not too bad. The Primary energy sources for S.C. total state electricity generation are 56.3% nuclear (the success of nuclear in S.C. is almost never discussed by the MSM), 18.6% coal, 19.8% natural gas and 5.2% renewables. Again, in my view, a nicely Balanced generation portfolio. The high percentage of nuclear generation is from old nuclear plants. Four nuclear units which started up in the 1970’s. As a resident of South Carolina, I appreciate the good record of reliability and affordability of our electricity. However, it should be noted that the future cost and affordability of electricity are in jeopardy if the current path to eliminate coal is not changed.
The States With the Highest Cost Electricity
Here are the top seven states with the highest cost electricity.
Additional references are included below to provide information on primary energy, electricity generation profiles of states and including the highest and lowest cost electricity in the U.S. and the world.
Bjorn Lomberg, One Practical Environmentalist
Lomberg has published numerous books, magazine articles, news articles and technical papers. He has been a consistent voice of reason. Here below is one of his charts published in Canada’s Financial Post on the cost of electricity in countries that have moved deeply into carbon free, wind and solar electricity generation.
The red circled statement in the lower right corner of the chart sums up wind and solar power generation. There is “No Cheap Electricity”. Dick Storm’s take is: There is reasonable cost, reliable electricity and that is electricity generated from coal. American policy makers should study the impact of green power being forced on Germany and the consequent deindustrialization, due to high energy costs. Several of Lomberg’s other publications are listed in the references.
Conclusions, The most important points I am trying to make are:
Solar and wind are NOT less expensive sources of primary energy to produce electricity 24/7 8760 hours per year
Coal, nuclear and natural gas provide Dispatchable, affordable power and the Result in lower power costs when applied in a Balanced Generation Portfolio produce the least cost and most reliable electricity generation
When wholesale and retail electricity rates are compared from states that have high percentages of coal, nuclear, natural gas and hydropower, they have the lowest electricity rates over the course of years.
When solar and wind are forced onto the Grid, it raises electricity prices. A very good example is Hawaii which once had a coal plant and then, blessed with plenty of wind and sunshine, tried to become Net Zero Carbon. The result is the highest electricity costs in America. I wrote a few articles on Hawaii as a perfect energy island example of applying the “Green New Deal”. With no Grid to connect, the true costs of electricity show up faster than they will in a states practicing the “Green New Deal” but are connected to the Grid such as California, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut and Maine.
The states with a high percentage of coal power generation also have amongst the lowest electricity prices
Thank you for taking time to read this and I encourage you to read more in the reference links provided below.
Congress should have reined in the Bureaucratic SWAMP monster long ago. Remember Charlie Reese’s editorial? The column title: 545 vs. 300 Million. It is here. The 435 members of Congress through their delegation of authority (or more correctly, abdication of responsibility) have allowed the EPA, Dept. of Education, Dept. of Energy and other Bureaucratic organizations to careen out of control to such an extent that they are now more lethal to our freedoms and prosperity than any other entity on planet earth. They have become the Deep State and are very intertwined (don’t forget the DOJ/Homeland Security open borders policy 2021 to 2024) with tax sheltered NGOs, certain politicians, members of the Judiciary, the United Nations, the World Economic Forum, and the other remaining heads of the SWAMP Monster. Follow the money is what Elon Musk is doing and so far, the findings are alarming. We the People have been funding much of what I and many others would consider enemies of our country. Yes, certain Rules and Regulations are against the best interests of America and I would categorize these rules and regulations as enemies from within. I wrote on Jan. 21, 2021 my thoughts regarding Joe Biden’s (un-American) policies. I thought at the time, Biden was more interested in a strong China than a strong and prosperous America.
Thomas J. Shepstone recently wrote on the USAID scandal. I liked the word GONGO that he coined. I am quoting Mr. Shepstone below and I used his graphic of the SWAMP Monster above:
“The USAID scandal grows with every chime of the clock on the wall. Jo Nova captures the essence of the crime:
Then this week it was revealed that the EPA has given $2 Billion dollars to a Climate Action Fund which is closely affiliated with Stacy Abrams. Excerpts from the New York Post follow:
“The Environmental Protection Agency recently discovered that the Biden administration awarded $2 billion to a climate group with ties to former Georgia Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, a fierce supporter of former President Joe Biden.
The money was earmarked for Power Forward Communities — a nonprofit partnered with multiple left-wing groups founded by Abrams and which the Georgia Democrat has stated she was “thrilled” to be part of, the Washington Free Beacon reported on Wednesday.
The funds were set aside at an outside financial institution — Citibank — before Biden left office and part of a larger, $20 billion pot of money the former president’s EPA received through the Inflation Reduction Act to dole out to climate groups.
“It’s extremely concerning that an organization that reported just $100 in revenue in 2023 was chosen to receive $2 billion,” EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin told the outlet, referring to Power Forward Communities’ latest tax filings. “That’s 20 million times the organization’s reported revenue.”
My take on all of this is, the corruption in government, and especially the Democrat Party is far worse than even I ever believed.
It turns out the Non-Government Organizations were really the Government.
The word for that is GONGO — a government organised non-government organisation.
“Hands up who is still reeling with the news that USAID had 50 thousand million dollars of political and media influence? The annual budget of $50 billion dollars in the hands of unaccountable activist NGOs buys a lot of “journalists,” editors and teenage protestors. Suddenly a lot of global patterns make more sense.” Thank you Thomas J. Shepstone!
GONGO the SWAMP Monster
I started using the term SWAMP Monster and few years ago. First, I referred to the “Six Headed SWAMP Monster”, then seven and now 14. The Deep State SWAMP MONSTER is the fourth branch of government and has been working against the best interests of the U.S.A. for decades.
Democrat Party
EPA
NGOs such as the Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council, Environmental Defense Fund and many more
Main Stream Media
Entertainment, Hollywood, TV
United Nations
World Economic Forum
Public education K-12 and Universities
The “Swamp Bureaucrats” in addition to the EPA and USAID who are employed by Federal and state government agencies creating excessively restrictive regulations and rules and funding anti-American activists
Leftist Lawyers practicing Lawfare and so-called “Environmental Justice”
Foreign governments
Wealthy Billionaires
Banking and Finance. World Bank, IMF and top financial institutions
Activist Judges
Conclusion
Thank God President Trump is President. The government corruption of NGOs, Bureaucrats and Democrats will be very difficult to root out in just four years. I support Elon Musk as head of DOGE and his team. I have wondered for a long time why so many anti-American Regulations and policies were implemented. Now, at least to me, it seems clear. The people that have been making these Regulations have never worked in the Private Sector, do not understand what it takes to run a business and they do not care about the pain and suffering they cause to productive Americans. As stated above regarding Biden, the policies they supported were slanted toward weakening of the U.S. and strengthening of China. I wondered about why the EPA implemented so many Un-American Rules, such as:
New Source Review
The CO2 Endangerment Finding
Unattainable Vehicle Fuel Mileage Standards
These and other Rules and Regulations have created a coming electricity generation crisis and very nearly destroyed American automobile manufacturing as well as other manufacturing such as, steel, aluminum, large steam generators and fuel burning equipment for conventional power generation.
A Revolving Door of Employment
Many of the key persons appointed to high levels in the EPA moved through a revolving door of employment from activist organizations. Such as the Natural Resources Defense Council, Environmental Defense Fund, Sierra Club, Planned Parenthood, Power Forward Communities and many more. These NGOs then are inter-related with the World Economic Forum, the United Nations and others as mentioned in the news stories above on USAID and the EPA. The corruption is far worse than even I thought it could be.
I will include some references below for further reading and support of my statements above. Thank you Elon Musk, President Trump, and all of the members of the Cabinet. Let’s Make America Great Again! You all have my humble but full support.
The Biden-Harris Administration and Congressional Democrats are Self Righteous, Environmental Zealots with low energy IQ’s, they are seriously misguided and have created anti-American energy policies that are impossible to achieve. These self righteous Bureaucrats and elected officials are detached from energy reality and are destroying our country. As the quote by Churchill’s Minister of Labour said, “Heaven Runs on Righteousness and the Earth Runs on Energy” Biden, Harris and the Democrats do not understand this.
My retired engineer friends and me are amongst the 5% or so of Americans that understand energy and electricity generation. These enviro-zealot government policy makers have been placed in office by the 95% majority that does NOT understand energy and electricity generation.
The majority of Americans have been misguided into believing carbon is an existential threat, worse than nuclear weapons or other catastrophes.
How? by the Main Stream Media, Entertainment personalities, “Woke” corporations and misguided, low energy IQ politicians.
President Biden has stated that Climate Change is an Existential Threat Facing Humanity He is wrong. The war on carbon is the threat to America’s future.
Coal power has provided the foundation of America’s Industrial strength and our high quality of life. Coal continues to be important, especially during times of peak Demand. Especially winter. For Industrial production, coal is used to produce 70% of the world’s steel, 90% of cement and 61% of the aluminum.
Energy is the Lifeblood of a Developed Country’s industrial productive capacity, social functioning, food production and job creating economy. The environmental Zealots are doing their best to bleed out the energy Lifeblood of our country.
Energy is the economy, it fuels our way of life and supports a strong national defense.
One Engineer’s Steam Venting Rant
Yes, some may say I am a grumpy old man. Well, maybe I am. As I see it, I have a lot to be grumpy about. I am not alone, I know dozens of other veteran engineers that worked the same productive decades I did, beginning in the 1960’s. We studied and worked hard, long hours and we did our best to contribute to building a better America. Especially, the reliable, affordable electric Grid. After working for over 50 years to do our parts in building the “Largest Machine in the World” the American Electric Grid, here we are watching as misguided enviro-zealots destroy the foundation of what we helped build. These enviro-zealots have low energy IQ’s, nearly zero understanding of how reliable power generation functions and as they work against the fuels we depend on. Worse yet, they do not seem to care about the consequences for our country.
I predict that Blackouts will become more common and power costs will continue to escalate, thanks to the Net-Zero carbon path the U.S. is on. The “Inflation Reduction Act” codified the “Green New Deal” into law and the increased anti carbon Regulations of the EPA and other Alphabet soup Federal agencies have America on a perilous path.
This winter will be difficult and it is likely that there will be more lives lost, such as Texas experienced in 2021 with the winter Blackouts. I am steamed up and this commentary is my way of venting that steam.
Electricity in the 1950’s to 1970’s
Let me quote a 1950 magazine ad by Babcock & Wilcox. The last line reads:
“B&W will cooperate with our busy Utilities for still further improvement-in service-and a way of life-that have made America great and strong”
My compliments to B&W, C-E, FW, G-E, Westinghouse, Riley, Alis-Chalmers, DeLaval (and many other fine U.S. supply-chain companies with hundreds of thousands of employees) and the electric Utility industry, yes they succeeded to make America Great and Strong!
For over a hundred years, America had the most reliable, most reasonable cost electricity Grid of any major nation. America set the standard of being the best at providing affordable and dependable electricity. The economy grew and the use of coal paralleled the growth of GDP.
Then the “War on Coal” began. I am still at a loss as to why there was so much angst against the very fuel that powered America through two World Wars and built the largest industrial economy in the history of the world. I have written much on the war on coal and some of the people and organizations that promoted the “Self Inflicted Electricity Crisis“(1,2,3,4, 5, 6, 7, 8,9,10,11) If you wish more background, much has been published, kindly read the referenced commentaries and references included at the end.
Here are some of my personal experiences and some of the reasons why I am irritated at the enviro-zealots.
America Had Over 100 Years of Affordable, Reliable, Abundant and Dispatchable Electricity Until the War On Coal Began in the 1990’s. Now, the Infra-Structure that provided the Foundation of our Reliable Electric Grid is Being Destroyed byPolicymakers that are either misinformed or they have low energy IQ’s and have NOT done their homework. U.S. Energy Policymakers have created this crisis, right before our eyes. In 2010 about 30% of the U.S. Electricity Generation Capacity was provided by Coal Fueled Power Plants and right at 50% of electricity generation was from coal fuel. Since 2010 about half of these have been shut down. Suitable replacement of new electricity generation should have been built first before destroying about half of the reliable coal plants in America. A Balanced Portfolio would and should have included new nuclear plants, new High Efficiency, Low Emissions (HELE) coal plants and of course, natural gas combined cycle plants.
At least 125,000 MW’s of New, In Kind Generation Capacity should have been built before destroying the existing reliable, affordable and Dispatchable coal plants.
I will attempt to explain what is being done to destroy electricity reliability and what should be done: Here is an example of a typical large Utility Coal Power Plant. The Roxboro Generating Plant of Duke Energy near Roxboro, NC. The first unit started up in 1966 and Unit #4 in 1980. This one is special to me, because I was the startup engineer for Unit #3 in 1973 and I worked at the plant on all four units for several different companies over my career. So, I am very familiar with all the plant major equipment.
This plant when operating at 2500 MWh and an 80% load factor will consume about 700 tons of coal per hour. This is seven full railroad coal cars. When operating as designed, it would consume about six million tons of coal per year. Let me compare this large Thermal Plant with a large Hydro Plant, say the Robert Moses Hydro-Electric plant at Niagara Falls. This one thermal power plant in Roxboro produces as much as this huge facility and it fits on a real-estate parcel of a few thousand acres. The Robert Moses hydroelectric plant is powered by rainwater runoff from eight U.S. states and one Canadian Province. The outflow of most of the water from the Great Lakes flows to the Niagara River and through the hydroelectric generators installed there.
Comparison of Energy Density, Coal, Hydro and Solar
How Much Power Generation is 2500 MW? Did You Ever Visit Niagara Falls? The U.S. Side New York Power Authority Generation Station that uses the American share of the total outflow of the Great Lakes is about the same size in Electricity Generation Capability as the Roxboro Coal Plant. The energy density of hydroelectric power is very low, it takes enormous amounts of land area and elevation change to provide the potential for hydroelectric generation. In North America, all the large sources of falling water have been utilized. Solar power to replace a coal plant the size of Roxboro has an even lower energy density, and it would require between 40 and 160 square miles of land area to provide intermittent 25% capacity factor generation when the weather permits. With battery storage, about 160 square miles would be required to replace a 2500 MW fossil plant. Even then solar power is weather dependent on clouds and sunshine. On reliability, a snowstorm will reduce output to zero and a hailstorm destroy the capacity for months until the panels can be replaced.
So, What’s the Problem?
Over 122,000 MW of electric power generation capacity has been demolished. This is the equivalent of 50 power plants the size of Roxboro Generating Station or the size of the Robert Moses Hydro-electric plant in Niagara Falls, NY.
There has NOT been a major new coal plants built in the U.S. since 2013. Yet, America is the Saudi Arabia of coal and within our country is the highest quality, high BTU, low ash coal found on the planet.
Low Energy IQ Decision in Minnesota
Tim Walz, Governor of Minnesota presided over the war on coal in Minnesota. Cheered on by CNN, here is the article where Minnesota and the “Woke” Utility serving that area have decided to shut down the very reliable Sherco Coal Plant (about 2700 MW) and replace it with solar panels. I am not kidding. Here is the link to the CNN article. From an energy and electricity planning standpoint, this is ludicrous. I have worked at the Sherco plant and it is, or at least was well run and well maintained. Like Roxboro Plant mentioned above, capable of generating electricity 24/7 in any kind of weather. Including during snow storms, hail storms, and cloudy days. This is irresponsible at the least. To be fair, it had to be agreed to by Xcel Energy’s “Woke” top management, who obviously have to know better? In my mind, I am at a loss to understand how Utility management can accept pressure from the government without educating the public and pushing back on un-American regulations. When Sherco is shut down, the winters in Minnesota will be more expensive and more difficult for the industries and residents.
Here are a couple of quotes from the CNN article by Xcel Energy President when talking about replacing the coal generation with solar panels: “It allows us to move much more quickly,” said Ryan Long, Xcel Energy’s Minnesota president, who called reusing the plant’s infrastructure “a real key to our strategy here.”
“We’re a good wind and solar state,” Wyckoff said. “Anything we burn that’s fossil fuel, we are importing. We are making the wind and solar electricity here.”
It’s also a huge step forward for Minnesota’s climate and clean energy goals. Under its Democratic governor and 2024 vice-presidential candidate Tim Walz, the state is aggressively trying to decarbonize its power sector — getting to 100% clean electricity by 2040.
“That is a key driver for how we’re going to decarbonize the rest of the economy,” Wykoff said. “We’re aiming to be clean economy-wide by 2050. And I think we can get there.”
Hmmm, I suggest revisiting the viability of solar to replace coal in January or the next Polar Vortex.
How Do We Treat the Most Reliable, Most Affordable Electric Generating Plants in the U.S.?
The picture above is the implosion of the Sutton Unit #3 at Duke Energy near Wilmington, NC. This one is also personal to me, because I was also the lead Boiler Startup engineer in charge in 1972 when Sutton #3 went into commercial operation.
To generate 122,000 MW, (a conservative estimate of the total reliable coal generation capacity destroyed since 2010) it would take 290 plants like this.
Who is Cheering as these Reliable Coal Plants are Demolished?
The Sierra Club website keeps score on their “Beyond Coal” Campaign and they show 385 total coal Units shut down since 2010. According to the Sierra Club, only 145 to go.
Oh yes, there are in fact other’s that are cheering for America to sabotage our electric Grid…..
Two fair questions can be asked:
1. Who cares?
2. Do we really need these old coal plants?
I will answer the questions with an emphatic Yes, I care and Yes, we need them! We do need the remaining 145 coal plants.
What Should America be Doing? In my opinion, we should be building new nuclear power plants right now. Also, at least 50 new HELE (High Efficiency, Low Emissions) 2500 MW coal plants. Until a new and expanded nuclear fleet can be designed, built constructed and proven, we should reinforce our electricity Grid with more conventional and Dispatchable generation. A coal plant handles the “Energy Storage” security concern by having the inherent capability of storing months of fuel on site. Electricity generation is Not dependent on “just in time” pipeline provided gas flow.
Overall, America produces about 16% of our electricity from coal fuel. However, three important differences of coal plants compared to solar and wind are: Coal power is Dispatchable. Coal plants can be ramped up in power output to match the Demand. Wind and solar are intermittent and are therefore, Non-Dispatchable. Some advantages of a coal plant:
Fuel Storage on site
Coal power is less expensive to produce
Coal power generation is dependable in all weather conditions, 24/7
The greatest need for coal plants come at peak Demand hours in the summer and the winter. Especially winter.
Energy Powers Economic Prosperity Reasonable electricity cost is especially important for Industrial production. For example, production of primary metals such aluminum, steel and copper use enormous amounts of electricity. Aluminum smelting requires 5 kWh per pound of aluminum smelted from aluminum oxide. That 5 kWh does not include the processing of Bauxite into alumina, transportation and ingot remelting, forging or sheet production. In my state of S.C. we have an aluminum smelter operated by Century Aluminum and a couple of steel mills operated by NUCOR. These use hundreds of Megawatts of power and that power must be of reasonable cost to remain competitive. When it comes to economic strength, it is Industrial production that provides the jobs that allow families to prosper. Over 40% of the world’s primary energy use is for primary metals production and manufacturing. Reasonable cost, reliable electricity generation is a pre-requisite for Economic Prosperity and especially, job providing Industrial production.
What About Wind and Solar? Can these Renewables Replace Fossil Fuels?
In terms of PRIMARY Energy, wind and solar, after decades of subsidies, provide an insignificant quantity of America’s Primary Energy.
The war on coal fueled power stations is contributing to the coming electricity reliability crisis. The War on Coal” is self-Inflicted and anti-American. Wind and Solar cannot replace the PRIMARY Energy of coal, nuclear and gas. Six materials that our society depends on require enormous amounts of energy and cannot be electrified: Steel, Aluminum, Plastics, Ammonia Fertilizer and Cement.
Electricity is Secondary Energy. Electrifying everything is impossible and needs to be evaluated by a new President and Congressional Leaders that care about the future of our country. Biden-Harris and the Democrats act as if they are puppets of Xi Jinping, Putin and the Ayatollah, working to weaken the U.S. from within.
So, What about China and the Rest of the World?
In 2023, more coal was burned in the world than ever in recorded history. Developing countries and the second largest economy of the world China are lifting people from poverty and increasing manufacturing using conventional forms of power generation, including coal. China now has over 400 new ultra-supercritical, coal plants either in permitting stages or under construction. China uses about 56% of the world’s total coal consumption to power its manufacturing economy. Long story short on the “Earth Running on Energy”, China Gets it!
China uses about 10 times the coal consumption of the U.S. In fact, China accounts for 56% of global coal demand. In 2022, coal provided more than 60% of China’s power generation.
What Would it Take to Replace Fossil Fuels for Electricity Generation?
The 2023 book by Donn Dears outlined what it would take to replace coal and gas power generation in the U.S. Here is his summary:
Nuclear power is the largest carbon free form of electric power generation and the best hope for the future. However, as Mr. Dears points out, it would take about 31 nuclear plant expansions such as that just completed last year at Georgia Power’s Plant Vogtle. That 2,200 MW expansion took over ten years to complete. Now how feasible is it for the U.S. supply-chain (including skilled talent) to build 31 Plant Vogtles every year from now till 2050?
Conclusions
America has NO Energy Policy only a Decarbonization PolicyOnly Climate Policies that attack the very fuels that our country depends upon. The Net-Zero Carbon Path that America is on will weaken if not destroy our country’s productive capacity. Worse yet, if CO2 emissions are a concern, then shutting down all of America’s coal plants will not make a difference anyway. Further, the science of Anthropogenic Climate Change is NOT settled and there are many Scientists that have strong arguments that the consumption of carbon is only a minor contributor to Climate Change. So, why destroy America’s productive capacity and cede further manufacturing jobs to China or other countries of the world? Especially when the so called “Climate Crisis” is really Climate Fraud. (181,182)
Much of this was presented at the Liberty University CEO-Summit September 24th in Lynchburg, VA.
Yours truly,
Dick Storm, October 3, 2024
Note: To give credit where it is due, the title is a paraphrase of Churchill’s Minister of Labour, Ernest Bevin. The full quote attributed to him: “The Kingdom of Heaven Runs on Righteousness,The Kingdom of Earth Runs on Energy”
Vaclav Smil book: “The Way the World Really Works” Dr. Steve Koonin book: “Unsettled” Science based web site on Climate Science: https://climate4you.com
Here’s what the IPCC really believes about the effects of climate change compared to other factors. All the rest is scare tactics, and gross exaggeration. No way 0.5C increase in temperature, if it occurs, could be anything but positive. Note the use of the words “small” & large” Dr. Pat&t=jx86j0I-tJuKCNreXz1BDA
Donn Dears book, “Have No Fear”
Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery book, “UnstoppableGlobal Warming” published 2007 Book, “Hot Talk, Cold Science” 3rd edition, 2021, By Singer, Legates and Lupo
CO2 Coalition has an extensive web site with more science based Climate and Atmospheric Science information: https://co2coalition.org
You Tube Presentation on the Influence of the Sun on Earth’s Climate, also at 3 minutes 10 seconds into the video, the recent excellent paper on Net Zero Carbon by William Happer, Richard Lindzen and W. A. van Wijngaarden is discussed, (link below) June 12, 2024: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfhbEDuZXDs
Ten organizations or entities that are responsible for the policies that are weakening and destroying America aka “The Indoctrination SWAMP Monster”
Since the 1990’s I have been aware of some anti coal politicians including Bill Clinton and then EPA Head Carol Browner. Also numerous NGO’s that demonize coal, all fossil fuels and nuclear such as the Sierra Club, Environmental Defense Fund, NRDC and many more.(75, 76, 77, 78, 79) Back in the early 2000’s when I was working hard to improve coal plant efficiencies, the EPA’s “New Source Review” (NSR) became an obstacle to plant upgrading and performance improvement. NSR was counter-productive to improving coal plant efficiency and reducing production costs. Curiously wrong for America? I wondered, “How can such reckless EPA Rules and policies prevail in this great country?” Based on problems my clients (mostly electric utilities) had with NSR, I started paying attention to the opponents of coal, nuclear and all conventional fuels. I subconsciously took in news and information to try to sort it out, Why? Also, I wrote articles for POWER Magazine, technical papers and gave presentations to Technical Societies or organizations on the topic of, “What if New Source Review Went Away?”
Many authors have written on the Washington “Swamp” Bureaucrats that set policies and laws which are against the best interests of America. The forces against the America I love are numerous and are pushing their agenda “as if” it is for the protection of human health or to save the planet. These well orchestrated organizations are what I have referred to as the “Seven Headed Monster”. Now, after thinking about it the Swamp Monster has ten heads and the policies and restrictions promoted are about control of our lives, one world government and yes, Socialism. The “Greens” are not about human health or saving the planet.(16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25)
I am not alone. Fortunately, (but much later than it should have been), the Supreme Court has called out the D.C. Regulatory Swamp by weighing in on the Chevron vs. Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) case. (2) Below is a copy of the depiction of Donald Trump and his Cabinet setting out to attack the SWAMP. This image is compliments of Patriotic artist Jon McNaughton. He captures the essence of excessive Regulations facing all of us Americans and President Trump. The artist describes his work, “Crossing the Swamp”. “Today, Trump endeavors to cross the “swamp” of Washington DC as he carries the light of truth, hope, and prosperity. The murky water of the deep state and the ten headed monster are laced with dangerous vermin, perfectly willing to destroy American prosperity for personal ideologies, financial gain and control of America by forces outside our borders. The establishment Democrats, Never-Trumper-Republicans, Deep State, and Fake News Media will do all they can to stop the majority of the American people from succeeding.” Also, some foreign involvement to support Green actions has been reported(71,72, 73, 74, 75, 76). Thank you Jon McNaughton for your outstanding painting! (1)
The purpose of this commentary is to summarize ten of the institutions, entities and organizations that function against the best interests of Americans and all of the people of the free western world. They call them “Climate Policies”, the agenda, however, is control over our lives and it is sinister.
The slide below is from one of my presentations. There are at least seven major groups within the U.S. that influence government energy policy. This illustration attempts to provide one graphic to show as the “Seven Headed Monster”. A short description of these people and organizations will follow. At the end of this essay is a list of references to support my conclusions and for further reading and research. America must win this battle. Currently, the “Indoctrination Swamp Monster” has ten heads when government agencies, government/social media/big tech and Dark Money from foreign adversaries are included.
1. Revolving Door of NGO Extremists Into Employment in High, Influential Government Positions
In 2007 there were over 100 new, clean coal plants planned for construction. Most of the proposed plants were cancelled.(3) During 2007, about 50% of America’s electric power generation was from coal fuel. America had the most reliable and affordable electric grid in the world. In 2008 President Obama came into office to “Change America”. In addition to dividing Americans, he immediately ramped up the war on coal. If you read on and check the references at the end, the connection between Socialism and environmental activism will be connected. During his two terms he appointed two extreme activists to head the EPA. First Lisa Jackson then followed by Gina McCarthy. Some of the Regulations (such as the Clean Power Plan of 2015) was later overturned in 2021 by SCOTUS in WVA vs. EPA. However, the damage to the supply-chain and new coal plant investment viability was done. Later ESG but that is a topic for another day.
Another huge factor was the masking of the high cost of renewables with a surge in availability of low cost natural gas production from Hydraulic Fracturing. The low cost gas fuel kept U.S. electricity prices stable and electricity production cost economical as many new highly efficient gas turbine combined cycle (GTCC) plants were built.
To my knowledge after about 2010 only about four major new coal plants were started up, Longview in WVA, Turk in Ark, Sandy Creek Energy Station and Cliffside in S.C. It was during the Obama Administration that it became apparent (to me) that extremists were planning, scheming and lying in wait to kill coal plants . Many key people in the Obama Administration were employed by NGO’s before and after the Obama Administration. Even while employed at NGO’s they had much to do with EPA Rules and other Bureaucratic (SWAMP) Policies. The report by the 114th Congress details the “Revolving Door” of activist/extremists and then placement into influential high government positions. (4) I wrote previous commentaries on U.S. Energy policy influencers, here, here and here.(6,7,8, 51, 85) Green policies are not only weakening America’s productive capacity, but also our military strength and readiness. (32, 87)
2. Wealthy Billionaires and Foundations
There are very wealthy people and Foundations whom are not trained or experienced in electric power generation, but may feel they are doing something good for the world by demonizing carbon and conventional forms of energy. Examples are Michael Bloomberg, Jeff Bezos, Tom Steyer, Bill Gates, the Rockefeller Foundation, Arabella Network and more. These people and foundations together have provided well over two billion dollars in funding to NGO’s to fight coal, oil, gas, Hydraulic Fracturing and even nuclear plants. These reports are public information and many links are included below.
3. The United Nations
The U.N. has become distracted from the founding principles of promoting peace in the world. Russia is fighting Ukraine in an unprovoked war. The terror organization Hamas attacks Israel. Meanwhile, the top priority for the U.N. is more emphasis on Climate Policies for the Free western world. The policies are a path to Socialism and One World Government, but are called, “Climate Polices” I have written on this here. (9) China and Russia continue to produce and use record quantities of fossil fuels. China burns more coal than all of the rest of the world put together.
4. The World Economic Forum
The WEF includes thousands of wealthy individuals, companies, government officials and the U.N. Most unelected officials that come together periodically to promote policies for the countries of the world. Including Climate Policies. Make no mistake, the WEF is radical and unapologetic for the policies they promote. For example, De-growth, De-Industrialization, De-population and Restrictions on private ownership. (19, 20, 21, 22, 112)
5. The Main-Stream Media
Internationally circulated newspapers, magazines, TV stations and Internet News, other than a few exceptions such as the Epoch Times, Newsmax and Fox, tend to spread the U.N., WEF, IPCC, and Scare monger messages to misinform and indoctrinate the general public with the UN-IPCC messages and agenda.
6. Public Education, K-12, Universities, Public Service Messages to the General Public
Textbooks and teaching in our schools is based on the “Science being Settled” on manmade global warming. When in fact, the science is not settled. However, the scare tactics have been going on for a full generation of youth that are now voting adults. Billions of people of the world have been indoctrinated and scared about Global Warming.
7. Woke Corporations
Several years ago I visited Disney World in Orlando. The exhibit of the movie “Frozen” had messages regarding the need to reduce our carbon footprint, etc. Other companies and including some electric Utility companies, also contribute to the indoctrination of the public on the demonization of carbon. Few utilities push back or resist the destructive path to exit coal and depend on more expensive, less reliable, weather dependent generation from wind and sunshine.
8. Government Funding Using Our Tax Dollars, Used Against the Best Interests of America
The Biden-Harris funding of $2 Billion taxpayer dollars has gone to promote climate action. (109, 110) Included is $50 million dollars to support anti-Israel, pro-Hamas so called, Social Justice. The huge dollar flows however, are through Planned Parenthood and the alignment of Abortion and Environmental activism. (95, 96, 97)
9. Dark Money, Including from Foreign Adversaries
Foreign influence of U.S. energy and environmental policy has been documented for many years. Numerous references are included below of funds from Russia, China and other foreign governments to influence U.S. environmental policy. As nearly everyone is aware, the Climate Policies promoted by the Paris Agreement have not reduced the fossil fuels production and use of Russia, China and other BRICS. Meanwhile, the U.S. Climate Policies are weakening our country and including military preparedness.(50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 71, 72)
10. Big Tech and Social Media
The influence of Big Tech and Social Media is well known. The involvement and cooperation with government is concerning. Especially when the topic of social credit scores and control over our lives as is experienced in China. Therefore, it is only mentioned as everyone has a very good idea of the influence of Tik Tok, Facebook, Twitter and other platforms. Especially on the younger generation.
Conclusion
The 2024 election is important to save America. This is not hyperbole. The alliances of the Deep State, entrenched Bureaucrats in our government, open borders, U.N. control of energy policy and ever greater influence from non-elected officials has our country on a path to destruction. The late Donn Dears wrote about a dozen books warning us about Net Zero policies. It was Donn Dears in one of his last conversations with me that said, “Dick, We have got to win this battle”. Yes we do Donn, RIP. You may not like Donald Trump’s mean Tweets or his sarcasm, however, there is no doubt about his policies are Pro-America and keeping our Pro-Constitutional Republic. I wrote on the “Saving America from Destruction, the Real Issues that Matter”. (111) Keeping in mind, Energy provides the basis for everything we do. Energy Independence and practical energy policies are a large part of keeping our freedoms. Please read some of the 113 references provided below.
Book: “Merchants of Despair” by Robert Zubrin, on Radical Environmentalists, Criminal Pseudo-Scientists and the Fatal Cult of Antihumanism: Published 2012 by Encounter Books and again in 2016 by the Heartland Institute
Sheldon Whitehouse’s new book where he will claim the opposition party does what he and his party have done very effectively, for decades: “The Scheme, where He accuses Republicans of using Dark Money”, when in fact, the Democrats do it much more: https://thenewpress.com/books/scheme
Dick Storm's Thoughts on Energy, Education, Economic Prosperity & Environmental Blog 
