33 Comments

Fantastic writing Mental! Another interesting and insightful piece.

Expand full comment

Absolutely on point. Why does it take 40 years to find someone who can craft an article. Many thx. BeN

Expand full comment
author

Thanks. It only took 39. (We started environMENTAL Dec 2022!)

Expand full comment

This is such an excellent recap of the current situation and how policy insanity has endangered the 'lucky 1 billion' who do not live in energy poverty. however, if we continue down the wind/solar route, we certainly will find ourselves there.

As we are beginning to see pushback against much of the regressive, I mean progressive, movement in many subjects, especially social topics, I expect to see the pushback here intensify greatly amid more and more electoral success for populist parties seeking to remove the engendered elitists from their roles.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks!

Expand full comment

Here's some relevant factoids for Part 2 of TGCW from the CIA Factbook regarding the United States:

https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/united-states/

Natural resources

coal, copper, lead, molybdenum, phosphates, rare earth elements, uranium, bauxite, gold, iron, mercury, nickel, potash, silver, tungsten, zinc, petroleum, natural gas, timber, arable land;

note 1: the US has the world's largest coal reserves with 491 billion short tons accounting for 27% of the world's total (Curious that this energy source has been demonized.)

note 2: the US is reliant on foreign imports for 100% of its needs for the following strategic resources: Arsenic, Cesium, Fluorspar, Gallium, Graphite, Indium, Manganese, Niobium, Rare Earths, Rubidium, Scandium, Tantalum, Yttrium; see Appendix H: Strategic Materials for further details https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/references/strategic-materials/

Here's a relevant entry from Appendix H:

Uranium (Symbol U - Atomic Number 92)

Description: Uranium is a common metal found in rocks all over the world. Uranium (see attached image) occurs in combination with small amounts of other elements. Uranium ranks 48th among the most abundant elements found in natural crustal rocks. It is 1.67 times more dense than lead.

Uses: Uranium is the fuel most widely used by nuclear power plants for nuclear fission. In nuclear fission, energy is released when atoms are split apart to form smaller atoms. Nuclear power plants use the heat from nuclear fission to produce electricity.

US Imports: 20,077 mt (2021)

Import Sources (2021): Canada, 15.6%; Kazakhstan, 37.4%; Russia, 14.3%; Australia, 15%; Namibia, 7.3%; other, 10.3%

World Resources: Economically recoverable uranium deposits have been discovered primarily in the western US, Australia, Canada, Central Asia, Africa, and South America. About 5.3% of the uranium delivered to US reactors in 2021 was produced in the US and

****> 94.7% came from other countries. <****

Substitutes: None

Note(s): Nuclear power plants use a certain type of uranium, U-235, as fuel because its atoms are easily split apart. Although uranium is about 100 times more common than silver, U-235 is relatively rare. After uranium is mined, the U-235 must be extracted and processed before it can be used as a fuel. Mined uranium ore typically yields 0.5 to 2 kg (1 to 4 pounds) of uranium oxide concentrate (U3O8 or yellowcake) per ton, or 0.05% to 0.20% yellowcake.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks, Gene!

Expand full comment

Most of that coal is in AK I believe, pretty ironic that Southcentral AK is looking at importing NG as our current Cook Inlet field is near depletion. Lots of NG still present but does scale with our population to drill/produce. News out that consideration is being given to a new CCS coal facility. Makes sense but evil right?

Expand full comment
author

Think WY's got you on the coal there, pardner. Though I do think its cool that apparently hunks of it wash up on the beach in places there.

CCS requires a proper geologic deposit in which to store it. Unless it's going to be used expressly for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) or they've dreamed up some other use. Geologic reservoir that's stable and pipe system to get there. Once you get past that hurdle, it'll take 15-30% more energy (coal) to operate the CCS system.

Expand full comment

Another very illuminating column!

Expand full comment
author

Thanks!

Expand full comment

Excellent article. It's time for the U.S. to take heed of communist regimes and stop feeding the dragon.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks.

Expand full comment

Great, informative article, thanks guys - in the new world order, the West is last

Expand full comment
author

Thanks. We don't think it'll ultimately work out that way. But it can sure seem that way at times.

Expand full comment

Well done, and thank you. A forceful, factual, and very logical illustration of how western "leaders" have brought about a very threatening condition to their citizens. Citizens, wake up! Start judging the elites not by intentions, but by results. "If government (federal, state, and local) were kitchen gadgets you bought on Amazon, you'd return them and demand a refund" (r)

Expand full comment
author

Thanks.

We might chuck them in the can and take the loss, for fear that what we'd bought on Amazon might be sold to someone else at their peril. ;)

Expand full comment

"America is positioned well to emerge from TGCW with the least damage."

This was an excellent post, gentlemen. Thank you. I would add a qualifier to your above conclusion. America will emerge with the least damage 'only after it realizes the folly of net-zero emissions, and changes course to pursue a responsible energy policy.'

Much ado (and rightfully so) is made over metals production and processing, but has anyone seriously looked at steel? If we wanted to reach net-zero with wind, my numbers (back-of-the-envelop, for sure) indicate about one-third of the US daily production would be needed. It would be worse for solar, as it requires about three times as much steel per megawatt! Has anyone asked where this steel is going to come from if we close all of our coal mines?

Oh, and we would need about 240 new, 3-MW wind turbines each day to get to net-zero by 2050. In our most productive year for adding wind (2020), the best we could do was 16 new, 3-MW wind turbines.

It doesn't matter a damn if you have the parts if you don't have anyone to put the parts together! The concerns about metals are only one part of the equation. Biden would have to literally tear down Trump's walls to find enough workers to build these monstrosities.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks. But we still down think there are enough wall workers to even come close!

Expand full comment

Given that the province of Saskatchewan is the world's largest producer of potash, and the second largest producer of uranium behind Kazakhstan, and hosts 40% of Canada's farmland, do you think the province is well-positioned to weather TGCW? Great essay.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks for the compliment.

SK is well positioned to weather TGCW for all the resources you mentioned and more.

In fact, for over two decades I’ve believed the last humans remaining on earth some day will be living between native Inuit areas in the farthest reaches of North America and the prairies of SK, AB, MB, with a few small groups in the U.S. in the Dakotas, MT, WY, and ID.

Resources, resourcefulness, heartiness.

Urban EcoLeftists in Vancouver, Toronto, Montreal, NYC, Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles, London, Paris and Berlin who know nothing about the “environment” will be among the first to perish. And it won’t be because of “climate change”.

Expand full comment

Don’t forget AK…

Expand full comment
author

We'd have AK in there, too for the same reasons but it's remote in relation to the other areas mentioned.

Expand full comment

Excellent geopolitical overview. Thank you for all your research.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks!

Expand full comment

Thanks for an excellent article. There are problems ahead. Significant problems. And with energy the vehicle and lunatics in the driver's seat, we're headed for tough times indeed. Sure, America 𝓂𝓪𝓎 come out of this better than some other countries. Feel free to think how bad it will be for them when the lights go out here.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks. Shudder to think.

Expand full comment

Excellent article. The graph of Californias energy cost is shocking. At .30 per hour no one can afford to turn the lights on much less charge all the electric vehicles they are mandating. Complete ban of the combustion engine by 2036? The results will be devastating. The commercial railroads will somehow convert to all electric to serve our west coast ports? Not going to happen.

Expand full comment

nice article. This is so worrisome and apparently no one can see it or do anything about it except spray money in every direction.

I’m always interested in average price calculations. In San Diego the on peak residential rate is 66 cents per KWh. On-peak is when you need your air conditioning. I see these 30 cent per kWh averages, and I wonder how that is possibly true. It should be much more. I think at this point most people in California would jump at the chance to pay 30 cents/kwh. All of the major utilities have asked for rate increases in the 20% range.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks. Expect a course correction. Only question is how much damage will be done before then.

Watch what happens in European elections this June.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Mar 11
Comment removed
Expand full comment

What a load! Human Induced Climate Change (HICC) is fiction.

Expand full comment
author

Somehow me thinks that China and Russia are not all that interested in "a more sustainable and prosperous future for all."

But, we can hope.

Expand full comment