Author: new energy hawk

As I have written, nuclear is an energy source that is extremely friendly to the environment and needs to be given serious consideration in the NewEnergy2040 initiative primarily in the interest of improved technology. I also noted that past and even current designs have challenges, not the least of which, is high cost and irrational resistance from nuclear opponents. Further, as I have written, in my view the past approach to nuclear power may not have been optimal. In that, I question for example, did we in fact employ the best technology; or in our zeal for size, did our power plants get too big to the point of over complicating design, construction and operation?

With that, I note with great enthusiasm that the the concept of Small Modular Reactors (SMR) seems to be picking up steam. Even companies that were previously not major participants in nuclear power production such as Rolls- Royce (Rolls-Royce plans to build up to 15 mini nuclear reactors in Britain; New Atlas, David Szondy, January 26,2020) plan to get into the act. SMR designs go to the very heart of the concerns I’ve had with earlier generation nuclear power. SMRs are smaller (e.g., 300 to 400 megawatts) making them much simpler and easier to site: they are modular and much easier to construct; the modules are built in a factory environment resulting in lower cost and better quality; and they incorporate many inherent safety features. The SMR movement in nuclear power is indeed very exciting and one to keep an eye on.

A significant aspect of NewEnergy2040 is innovation. America leads the world in innovation and that will be the engine that drives our energy successes. NewEnergy2040 embraces continued use of fossil fuels through a transition period to new sources of energy. Call it new or call it technology improvement, coal gasification is a technology that needs in-depth consideration. Some of the biggest challenges in the production of synthetic gas (syngas) is that it is a complicated and expensive process. However, recent developments by engineers at Rice University may change that. (Gasification Goes Green: Low-Temp Photocatalyst Slashes Carbon Footprint for Syngas, Rice University, January 11, 2020.) At Rice, they have developed “a light-powered nanoparticle that could shrink the carbon footprint of a major segment of the chemical industry.” Developments such as this could simplify, and in turn, reduce the cost of syngas production. Is coal gasification feasible? This one innovation could play a significant role in answering that question.

Now it’s Liz Warren turn! If she has her way, some of the untold trillions of dollars that I feared would be frivolously spent on renewable energy sources is in the works. Warren just proposed a $10.7 trillion plan that would include pushing for !00% carbon-neutral power by 2030 and a 100% emissions-free electricity supply by 2035. Needless to say this mere $10 trillion is only the tip of the iceberg. How do we pay for it? You, my friend, will have the privilege of purchasing green bonds (sounds a little like the green stamps of old) to give you “the opportunity to own a piece of the climate solution”. Whoopee! Where can I get me a bunch of those for my portfolio?

Insanity begets insanity! Not to be outdone by The Green New Deal, Michael Bloomberg, during a campaign stop in Virginia on December 13th rolled out his proposed energy plan. In it he proposes to shut down all 251 of our remaining coal power plants and halt construction of 150 new gas facilities. All this to achieve his goals of reducing carbon emissions by half in ten years and for America to be generating 80% of its electricity from green energy sources, mainly wind and solar, by 2028. (New York Post, Bloomberg would shut down coal plants if elected president, December 13, 2019). Some are predicting that the world will end in a short 10 to 12 years if we don’t change our ways by yesterday. If Bloomberg were to have his way, millions of Americans will be “freezing in the dark” when the end comes.

The purpose and intent of this website/blog is to create a platform for addressing the critical need to dialogue about the future of energy production and use in the United States. As outlined on the pages of this website (which I encourage you to read), I am extremely concerned about ill-advised schemes that have been recently proposed by others, including representatives of the U.S. Congress, for among other things the production and use of energy in our country. Of course, as I have written, the grand prize for such schemes goes to The Green New Deal, although I must admit I have not yet digested the recent proposal called The Blue New Deal. Considering its source, I suspect it may rival The Green New Deal for absurdity. My hope is that we can move beyond such schemes and apply some common sense to the energy discussion.

I must also state that, as the greatest country in the world, it is particularly frustrating that we do not seem to be able to come to a common sense, yet potentially revolutionary, long-term energy policy or strategy. Many of us are concerned about the environmental impacts resulting from our energy production and use, and in fact, the zealots are more than willing to lay much of the blame for their global warming assertions on us without regard for the destruction of our economy in the process. This insanity has to be cured by a strategy that cements our energy leadership role in the world, preserves our way of life, and creates a sensible energy future that will prevail for many generations.

I invite your comments and input.