Tag Archives: fossil fuels

environmental news, political news, State news

Nuclear power … time for a return

nuclear%20plant_1

Many Americans long have feared nuclear energy.

To be honest, I was one of them. I no longer fear it.

An essay in the New York Times makes a compelling argument that the time to bring nuclear energy back into the discussion of clean alternatives to coal has arrived. Why not now, while 150 or so world leaders are meeting in Paris to talk about climate change?

Technological improvements have greatly improved nuclear power’s safety record. Peter Thiel’s essay in the New York Times makes a most interesting point.

Remember the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan in 2011? Thousands of people died in the earthquake and tsunami that ravaged Japan and destroyed the Fukushima nuclear plant, Thiel writes. Not one person died of radiation poisoning, he adds.

Time for a “new atomic age.”

Yes, there have been disasters, notably the Chernobyl event in Russia in 1986; Three Mile Island before that.

But in the intervening years, nuclear power has become many times safer.

I’m all in on efforts to harvest the wind — which is being done in places like the Texas Panhandle, where my wife, one of our sons and I live. I want there to be more exploration of natural gas, which also is in abundance throughout West Texas. With the abundant sunshine we have in this part of the world, it’s high time we invested far than we do in solar energy.

These all are viable alternative energy sources that must become part of the nation’s wide-ranging effort to wean ourselves of fossil fuel and coal.

We’re neglecting any serious discussion, though, of nuclear energy.

It’s interesting that a climate change conference is being held in a country, France, that relies heavily on nuclear power to keep the lights on.

Roughly 75 percent of France’s energy needs are met by nuclear power plants. It’s ironic, to my way of thinking, that nuclear energy isn’t being discussed as openly as it should, given the location of this climate change conference.

President Obama can seize the moment as he enters the final year of his presidency, according to Thiel.

As Thiel writes: “Both the right’s fear of government and the left’s fear of technology have jointly stunted our nuclear energy policy, but on this issue liberals hold the balance of power. Speaking about climate change in 2013, President Obama said that our grandchildren will ask whether we did ‘all that we could when we had the chance to deal with this problem.’

“So far, the answer would have to be no — unless he seizes this moment. Supporting nuclear power with more than words is the litmus test for seriousness about climate change. Like Nixon’s going to China, this is something only Mr. Obama can do. If this president clears the path for a new atomic age, American scientists are ready to build it.”

 

local news

Those signs look different to us now

ADRIAN, Texas — It’s weird how economic trends can make one look at virtually everything a little differently.

Often, we long for the old days. Not today when my wife and I noticed a sign on an abandoned gasoline service station on the south side of Interstate 40 in this tiny town just this side of the New Mexico border.

A Shell gasoline dealership went dark I’m guessing about a year ago. How do I know that?

The sign for regular unleaded gasoline read “$3.89.” That would be the price per gallon of gasoline.

Let’s flash back for a moment to the time when gas prices were skyrocketing into the ionosphere — or some layer far above Earth’s surface. You’d see a sign in front of a vacant gasoline station and it would advertise a price of, oh, let’s say $1.89 per gallon of regular unleaded gas. You’d long for the day when prices would return to that level.

Well, today we received a signal that sent precisely the opposite message. We do not want to see prices return to the total posted on that empty Shell station perched on the farthest western edge of the Texas Panhandle.

We rolled into Amarillo a little while later and were pleased to see that prices hadn’t spiked too terribly while we were away for a week out West.

Perhaps we ought to preserve these relics just to remind us what can happen to the price of fossil fuel when we get careless with the way we use it.

 

 

business news, national news

What about consumers of oil?

The media and others keep reporting about the impact that the collapsing price of oil is having on the oil industry and those who work in it.

I feel for them, with their jobs on the line. It’s getting less cost-effective to explore for oil and produce it when the price falls from $100-plus per barrel to less than $50.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/oil-rally-seen-reversing-as-rising-us-supply-deepens-glut/ar-BBhHhF7

But what about the consumer? What about the family that is now spending considerably less for gasoline then it was a year or two ago? How about those folks who suddenly find themselves with more disposable income, money to spend on other essentials — such as, oh, food and clothing?

The recent uptick in fuel prices is now expected to revert to recent trends as the nation’s oil glut continues to grow. It’s been an amazing spectacle to watch as street-corner gasoline dealers drop prices as many as three times daily.

I’ve talked here about the “new normal” in gas pricing being elevated to heights none of us imagined when we were much younger and were spending about four bits for a gallon of gas. I remember my parents pulling up to the gas pump and telling the attendant, “I’ll take a dollar’s worth of regular.” We won’t return to those days, but we’re a lot closer to them today than we were in 2013.

It’s that result that prevents me from crying too heavily over the fortunes of those who work on the oil field pipelines or at the refineries that turn crude oil into gasoline or diesel.

My wife and I will keep driving our hybrid motor vehicle — just like millions of other Americans — and will keep working to build up that supply of fossil fuel that contributes to the plummeting price of gasoline.

 

national news

Keystone Pipeline to get a veto

2 Comments

President Obama’s press spokesman said today the president is set to veto a bill authorizing the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline from Alberta to the Texas Gulf Coast.

I’ve waffled and wavered a bit on this, but I remain (more or less) convinced that the pipeline is a positive thing to do.

Thus, the president’s veto pen should go back into the drawer. But it won’t.

It’s going to mark the first big confrontation between the Democratic president and the Republican-led Congress that just took its seat on Capitol Hill. Republicans control both legislative houses, but they don’t have enough votes to override and Obama veto.

So, what’s the problem with the pipeline?

Foes say it’s environmentally hazardous; they say the oil won’t benefit North American consumers; they’re dubious about the number of jobs it will produce.

White House press secretary Josh Earnest said the president doesn’t want Congress to “circumvent” the studies that’s ongoing regarding the pipeline. That’s one reason for the veto.

I recall hearing from the State Department that the environmental impact of the pipeline would be minimal. Is that an invalid assessment?

As for the impact of the oil on prices that are still in free fall, I happen to believe that any production of oil that continues to flood the market and enables worldwide supply to outpace demand is ultimately good for consumers — such as me and you.

So what if it won’t end up in North American gasoline tanks? It’s going to add billions of gallons of fuel to the world market. Is that not a net plus for consumers?

Let’s watch this confrontation unfold. It’s going to be the first of many nasty fights set to ensue between the White House and the 114th Congress.

 

business news, environmental news, International news

Don't bet on OPEC

It’s gratifying to me to see the United States and Canada standing up to other oil-producing regions in the ongoing battle to control the price of fossil fuel.

According to an analysis on MSN.com, the North Americans are winning the fight.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/opec-is-wrong-to-think-it-can-outlast-us-on-oil-prices/ar-BBgej5T

The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries recently declined the opportunity to reduce production. The non-action sent Brent crude to new low prices. According to MSN: “The Saudis appear to be spoiling for a fight, trying to find out exactly how cheap oil must be to force surging U.S. shale-oil production to seize up like an unlubricated engine.”

The gratification comes in the knowledge that North Americans finally seem to understand the need to conserve energy and to use alternative sources of energy. Yes, the production of shale oil in North Dakota and Montana also is helping boost oil supplies that have been outstripping demand; the result has been the plummeting prices we’ve seen across the country.

Shale oil is less expensive to produce than when it first came onto the oil-production scene, according to MSN.

Add the falling production costs of shale oil and the growing use of alternative sources — wind, sunlight and hydropower, to name just three — then OPEC’s influence on world oil price becomes diminished.

We’ve come a good distance from the days of the Arab Oil Embargo, correct?

 

Uncategorized

Here comes the sun … power

President Obama has decided to crack down on carbon dioxide emissions produced by power-generating plants.

He has implemented federal environmental rules requiring a 30 percent reduction in emissions by 2030. Is the president the enemy of the coal industry, which produces a lot of energy to fuel these plants? Not according to Bloomberg View, which reports that the solar industry is the biggest threat to the fossil fuel industry.

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-06-04/obama-isn-t-killing-power-plants-the-sun-is

I’ve read the article attached here and it brings to mind something I’ve wondered for almost the entire time I’ve lived in West Texas: Why isn’t solar energy more prevalent here?

I think I know one reason: natural gas. We have lots of natural gas here and it remains a large employer and is quite important to the electricity-generation grid. There’s little incentive, therefore, to move away from natural gas.

West Texas is producing a lot more wind energy now than when we moved here in early 1995. Indeed, Texas and California are the two top alternative-energy producing states in the country — a fact that I’m sure drives the governors of both states, Democrat Jerry Brown of California and Republican Rick Perry of Texas stark-raving mad.

West Texas also has a large amount of sunshine. The Panhandle has more than 300 days of sunshine annually. We can erect a lot of solar panels on new home construction here and have them heat and cool houses while using less fossil fuel that has limits on its supply.

As Carl Pope, a Sierra Club activist, writes for Bloomberg View: “Solar panels — whether utility scale or residential rooftop — generate maximum power on exactly those hot afternoons when demand peaks. What’s more, they do so at no marginal cost; the sun is free. This reduces reliance on peakers, causing prices to fall across the board, including for customers without solar power.”

It’s an interesting concept that ought to find its way to West Texas … eventually.

Uncategorized

Global warming risks mount up

The United Nations says that global warming is putting billions of Earth residents at risk.

OK. Earth’s climate is changing and we’d better do something about it. Or else. That settles it, right?

Not even close.

http://news.msn.com/world/global-warming-dials-up-our-risks-un-report-says

You see, what’s going to happen now is that global warming-climate change deniers are going to take dead aim at the authors of this report. They will say the U.N. is nothing but a bunch of politically correct greeners, lefties whose major intent is to destroy industry as we’ve known it and, while they’re at it, destroy our way of life.

“We’re now in an era where climate change isn’t some kind of future hypothetical,” said the lead author of the report, Chris Field of the Carnegie Institution for Science in California. “We live in an area where impacts from climate change are already widespread and consequential.”

I happen to concur with what the basic outline of the report, which is that the planet’s climate is changing. I’m trying to keep something of an open mind as to the cause: manmade or part of the planet’s ecological cycle.

But let’s assume for a moment that the change in Earth’s climate is all part the planet’s cycle, that there’s nothing we can do about it. Does that mean, then, that we should just sit back and let nature take its course? I think not, given that the very lives of billions of people are going to be affected by things such as sea level increases and possible loss of livelihood as natural resources diminish and possibly disappear.

Extreme weather is getting more extreme. The planet is getting warmer, believe it or not. Yes, we had a chilly winter with lots of snow and ice. The bigger picture tells us that average temperatures continue to rise.

Would reductions in greenhouse gas emissions matter? Must we end the massive deforestation in the tropics? Yes to both. Is there a relationship between the deforestation and the increase in greenhouse gas? Duh!

That’s one example of how humans can affect the change in climate. The report is much more comprehensive and should be taken seriously.

Yes, especially if it comes from the United Nations.

Uncategorized

New normal in gas prices no longer so new

The “new normal” in gasoline prices used to be cause for laughter around our house.

I remember when Mom or Dad would pull up to the service station pump and tell the attendant — yes, they still have attendants in my home state of Oregon — to put a “dollar’s worth of regular” into the tank. That would be about four gallons. Off we went and tooled around for the rest of the day, maybe a bit into the next one.

Those days are gone.

Now comes news that gas prices are declining. They’re at the lowest level since 2010. They’re heading downward into the new year.

Gas prices at lowest level since 2010

It’s not that we should be surprised that gasoline still costs about $3 a gallon in Amarillo, which is a bit lower than the rest of the state. My wife and I just returned from the Metroplex and were surprised to learn that drivers there are paying about 20 cents more per gallon than we are.

We’re all going to welcome the prospect of paying less for gas in the new year — and hopefully beyond.

Automakers are building more fuel-efficient cars, people are buying them (we’re driving a Toyota hybrid and loving the 45 miles per gallon were getting with that little buggy) and domestic energy producers are pulling a lot of oil out of the ground in newly discovered well fields way up yonder near the Canadian border.

I still have to chuckle at the notion that gasoline that dips below 3 bucks a gallon is now considered “cheap.”

My memory of the old days remains too fresh.

Uncategorized

Economy jumps ahead, but few folks notice

The latest report from the U.S. Commerce Department about the state of the nation’s economy has me wondering about something.

When are Americans going to start accepting that we are recovering from the Great Recession of 2008-2009?

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/economy/193730-economy-jumped-41-percent-in-third-quarter

Commerce officials report that the economy grew 4.1 percent in the third quarter, which is revised upward from 3.6 percent — which isn’t a bad report, either.

Joblessness is down to 7 percent. We’re adding an average of just less than 200,000 jobs a month; the vast bulk of those jobs are in the private sector. Foreclosure rates on homes are at a five-year low. Companies are making money. The stock market is rockin’ and rollin’. The Federal Reserve Board is going to start scaling back the stimulus initiatives it launched with its bond-buying.

And yet …

We keep hearing pundits, commentators and some economists harping about a struggling economy.

I totally understand that a 7 percent unemployment rate isn’t good. It’s a lot better than where it was four years ago. And it’s trending downward.

Some leading individuals — such as former Texas Workforce Chairman Tom Pauken — have griped openly about what they’ve called a “jobless recovery.” Employers are finding they’re able to boost productivity with fewer employees; I despise the term “workers,” by the way. However, we’re not in the middle of a “jobless recovery.”

I should add that energy production — which helps fuel the Texas economy — is way up. The Energy Department reports our oil imports are way down and the United States is on the verge of becoming the world’s leading producer of fossil fuels, a spot occupied for many decades by Russia.

The gloomy Gus crowd, though, keeps winning the argument.

How come? What am I missing?

Uncategorized

Share the credit over good energy news

Politics by definition is a competitive sport of sorts, with folks on one side trying to get the advantage over those on the other side.

So it is with the news about U.S. energy production.

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/191163-white-house-gop-battle-over-energy-production-surge

Republicans say they deserve credit for their hands-off policies that have allowed energy producers to explore for fossil fuels on private lands. Democrats hail their policies that have promoted more renewable energy resources, decreasing the demand on fossil fuels.

Who gets the credit for some good energy news?

Both sides deserve a share of it. Why not spread the good cheer around?

Oh, I forgot. Politics gets in the way.

My Republican friends here in the Texas Panhandle aren’t willing to give those blasted Democrats any credit for anything. They contend that Democrats have worked to stifle energy production by seeking to ban exploration on public lands and by creating a tax environment that makes it cost prohibitive for energy producers to, well, produce energy.

Some of that criticism is fair. Some of it isn’t.

Democrats, led by the president of the United States, have sought to incentivize exploration and production of alternative energy. Wind, solar and hydro power are replacing fossil fuel-driven energy plants.

Automakers are getting smarter about building more fuel-efficient motor vehicles.

It’s not that we’re no longer drilling for oil and natural gas. The Energy Information Administration reports that the U.S. energy producers developed 7.7 million barrels per day in October, which means that the country produced more oil than it imported for the first time since 1995.

All of this news, taken together, gives all the principals a hand in this relatively good news.

The Obama administration has helped it along with its push toward greater use of alternative energy sources. Republicans have done their part by pursuing greater exploration for domestic fossil fuel.

There. Share the credit.