Fossil Fuel Disappearing without Replacement

 The Wall Street Journal article “Behind the Energy Crisis: Fossil Fuel Investment Drops, and Renewables Aren’t Ready,” illustrates the problems with a too rapid switch to renewables.  Its only mention of nuclear power is to report that California is planning to retire is last nuclear power plant, Diablo Canyon, which supplies nearly 10% of the electricity in the state.  Across the US, nuclear power supplies about 20% of electric power, although it constitutes only about 10% of generating capacity.  Nuclear is used more intensively than other power sources, according to the US Energy Information Administration.  This chart from the Wall Street Journal article shows that the main replacement anticipated for fossil fuels is batteries.  However, batteries cannot produce energy; they only store energy.  The same is true for hydrogen, which has to be produced using another kind of energy, and then it can be stored until needed.  Nuclear power actually produces electricity on demand without releasing any greenhouse gases.  

The article points out that investment in oil and gas is declining, without studying whether the growth in renewables can replace the fossil fuel being lost.  New wells are not being drilled.  Today we find the price of oil, natural gas, and coal rising because renewables cannot meet even current demand at the end of the pandemic.   

Nuclear power could be an important contributor to the energy shortage if irrational fear of nuclear reactors could be dealt with.  In the great scheme of things, fewer people have probably been killed by nuclear accident, even including Chernobyl and Fukushima, than by polluting emissions from conventional fossil fuel plants.  Because of this fear, however, long lead times will be needed to construct new nuclear plants, because of various restrictive regulations, environmental impact statements, etc.  Because climate change is coming so fast, we need to get started building new nuclear power plants as soon as possible.  

Brooks: Immigration and Multi-Culturalism

 In his recent column, David Brooks praises diversity and multi-culturalism as the saviors of the American nation. He writes:

Wednesday night I had the chance to walk around Lower Manhattan where my ancestors immigrated and built new lives, and to talk with some more recent immigrants whose experiences were similar to my family’s, though separated by decades and origins.

I thought about what a large role humiliation has played in American history: The pogroms and the Holocaust that terrorized Jews and sent them fleeing. The degrading poverty of the Irish famine. The religious persecution of the Puritans. The horror of the slave ships and bondage. The dehumanizing treatment of asylum seekers on the southern border. Give me your “wretched refuse,” Emma Lazarus wrote. Very few grandees came here bathed in adoration.

David Brooks, New York Times

I think Brooks l;oses sight of the importance of the unifying contrubution of the relatively rich, priviliged “Founding Fathers” whobroke with England and wrote the Constitution. They had similar cultural heritages from Western Europe. These ideas served America well for 200 years. I think Brooks recognizes the value of their contribution, even if he does not mention it in this column.

Iraqi Elections

 Fareed Zakaria wrote:

Just weeks after the tragic fall of Afghanistan, something important has happened in the other country in which the United States conducted a great nation-building experiment over the past two decades: Iraq held elections, which were mostly free and fair. Assuming this process leads to the formation of a new government, it will be the sixth peaceful transfer of power since 2004. Although turnout was at a record low, this election marks real progress. A senior Iraqi official described it to me as “a political earthquake.”

Fareed Zakaria, Washington Post

I am not so snaguine about the Iraqi elections, but I hope Fareed is right.  I am worried that Iraq may follow Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria, Libya, maybe Tunisia, Lebanaon, and others down the tubes.  Corruption, religion, and triabalism make democracy difficult in the Middle East.  I am not sure the unifying forces in Iraq can overcome the forces of fragmentation.  

Biodiversity Convention

 This week, environment officials, diplomats and other observers from around the world gathered online, and a small group assembled in person in Kunming, China, for the meeting, the 15th United Nations biodiversity conference.

The United States is the only country in the world besides the Vatican that is not a party to the underlying treaty, the Convention on Biological Diversity, a situation largely attributed to Republican opposition. American representatives participate on the sidelines of the talks, as do scientists and environmental advocates.

Washington Post

The person primarily responsible for the US not being a member of the Biodiversity Convention is William Kristol, who was Vice President Dan Quayle’s chief of staff when the Convention was negotiated. It was to be signed at a big UN meeting on the environment in Rio de Janeiro. There were two big agreements on the table, biodiversity and climate change. Because of pressure from the Republicans, mainly exerted by Kristol in Quayle’s office, then-President George H.W. Bush felt that he could not sign both. So he signed the agreement on climate, but refused to sign the agreement on biodiversity.