Congressional Efforts Grow To Deport Visa Holders Who Support Hamas

Energy News Beat

The US State Department confirmed this week that it has the authority to revoke the visas of foreign nationals who express support for Hamas while living in the US.

The announcement said it has “broad authority under the INA [Immigration and Nationality Act] to revoke visas” – contained in a letter issued to Sen. Marco Rubio, who is leading Congressional efforts to allow for the deportation of Hamas supporters.

The State Dept. said “We exercise the authority when there is information or evidence indicating a visa holder may be ineligible for a U.S. visa.”

Hamas became an officially designated foreign terrorist organization in 1997, and current US laws say that not only terrorists themselves but are those who have “persuaded others to endorse or support” a designated terror group are banned from US soil.

“Even after issuance of a visa, the Department of State works closely with the Department of Homeland Security and other partner agencies to ensure every visa applicant is continuously screened to ensure they remain eligible for travel to the United States,” the letter to Sen. Rubio explained.

Of course, the millions of illegal immigrants currently inside the country, with more pouring in by the day, would fall through the cracks in terms of any such screening.

The effort of Rubio and other GOP reps to place more scrutiny on any potential Hamas supporters comes amid the backdrop of large pro-Palestinian protests which have taken over many college campuses and some cities. Jewish groups have also claimed a rise in “antisemitic attacks” – and have cited that in some cases Leftist students have carried signs that express sympathies with Hamas.

Trump has lately expressed support for the move as well…

This has outraged Rubio and other Congressional leaders. He wrote to the Biden administration this week, “I urge you to immediately use existing law to eradicate this hate from our country.”

He added, “In addition, I will be introducing legislation to provide further tools to ensure supporters of Hamas, and other FTOs [foreign terrorist organization], do not benefit from our country’s generosity.”

Loading…

Real Estate Investor Pulse

1031 Exchange E-Book

ENB Top News 
ENB
Energy Dashboard
ENB Podcast
ENB Substack

The post Congressional Efforts Grow To Deport Visa Holders Who Support Hamas appeared first on Energy News Beat.

 

Work starts on new CMA CGM’s LNG-powered giant

Energy News Beat

China’s Hudong-Zhonghua has kicked off the construction of a new series of 23,000-teu LNG dual-fuel containerships for French shipping giant CMA CGM.

The shipbuilder held the steel cutting-ceremony on November 17 for the vessel with a working name H1904A on November 17.

Hudong-Zhonghua said this is the first of four 23,000-teu vessels CMA CGM ordered last year.

CMA CGM is expected to take delivery of these ships in 2025 and 2026.

The vessels will have a total length of 399 meters, a width of 61.3 meters, and a design draft of 14.5 meters.

Such as the previous vessels, these LNG-powered giants feature WinGD’s dual-fuel engines, as well as GTT’s 18,600-cbm fuel tank.

Hudong-Zhonghua and Jiangnan, both part of CSSC, previously delivered nine 23,000-teu LNG-powered vessels to CMA CGM.

In June 2021, CMA CGM welcomed the ninth and the last vessel in this series, Sorbonne, in its fleet.

Image: Hudong-Zhonghua

Hudong-Zhonghua said in separate statement that the 13,000-teu LNG-powered containership, CMA CGM Bahia, has completed its gas trials on November 17.

This is the first of six 13,000-teu LNG-powered containerships Hudong-Zhonghua is building for CMA CGM.

The Chinese shipbuilder launched this LNG-powered containership in May this year.

Hudong-Zhonghua and Jiangnan Shipyard are each building six LNG-powered ships for CMA CGM as part of a deal revealed in April 2021, but the six vessels at Jiangnan have a capacity of 15,000 units.

Moreover, the new LNG-powered vessels also feature GTT’s Mark III containment system and WinGD’s dual-fuel propulsion.

The vessel’s LNG tanks have a capacity of 14,000 cbm.

Hudong-Zhnoghua said that CMA CGM Bahia is equipped with the world’s first CMD-WinGD9X9DF-2.0 main engine.

Following delivery, it will be the largest dual-fuel containership operating on South American routes, it said.

The post Work starts on new CMA CGM’s LNG-powered giant appeared first on Energy News Beat.

 

Gaz-System’s second Gdansk FSRU fails to secure sufficient capacity bookings

Energy News Beat

Poland’s Gaz-System said it had not received binding capacity orders at a “sufficient level” to proceed with the implementation of the second FSRU as part of the LNG import project in Gdansk Bay.

In July this year, Gaz-System launched a binding season for capacity bookings at the planned second FSRU with a capacity of 4.5 bcm in July this year.

Prior to that the firm completed a non-binding market test to asses the demand for additional regasification capacity and the interest in export of regasified LNG towards Slovakia, Lithuania, Denmark, Germany, as well as the Czech Republic and Ukraine.

Gaz-System said in a statement that the submission phase for long-term binding offers has ended on October 27.

The overall objective of the binding FSRU 2 open season procedure was to confirm the interest of market participants in increasing the regasification capacity of the FSRU terminal which would justify the implementation of the project.

However, the procedure “did not result in Gaz-System obtaining binding orders at a sufficient level to proceed with the implementation of the FSRU 2 project,” the firm said.

“Nevertheless, the interest in the regasification services declared by the participants imply that discussions may be continued in the future,” Gaz-System said.

The firm said the project will be the subject of further analysis.

In addition, the hydroengineering infrastructure that will be built as part of the FSRU 1 terminal project will also provide for the possibility of a second storage and regasification unit development if market demand for the FSRU 2 is confirmed in the future, Gaz-System said.

Currently, Gaz-System said it continues its efforts aimed at installing the first FSRU in the Gdansk area and designed to provide annual regasification capacity of up to 6.1 bcm.

Oslo-based BW LNG, a unit of Singapore’s BW, and Japan’s MOL have been shortlisted by Gaz-System to provide Poland’s first FSRU as part of the Gdansk LNG import project.

The provisions of the term sheet do not constitute binding obligations for the parties but set out the ‘roadmap’ for further negotiations of the charterparty and their essential content will be reflected in the final charter agreement, it said.

Gaz-System plans to conclude the deal with one of the two firms for a period of 15 years.

Poland’s Orlen has booked entire 6.1 bcm per year of regasification capacity at Gaz-System’s planned FSRU-based LNG import facility.

Orlen is already in charge for all of the supplies coming to Gaz System’s LNG import terminal in Swinoujscie, Poland’s first such facility, via PGNiG.

The firm completed in November last year its merger with Poland’s dominant gas firm, PGNiG.

Gaz-System plans to launch the FSRU-based project, backed by the EU, in early 2028.

The post Gaz-System’s second Gdansk FSRU fails to secure sufficient capacity bookings appeared first on Energy News Beat.

 

China’s LNG imports climb in October

Energy News Beat

China’s liquefied natural gas (LNG) imports rose in October compared to the same month last year, according to customs data.

Data from the General Administration of Customs shows that the country received about 5.17 million tonnes in October, a rise of 29.5 percent compared to the same month last year.

LNG imports in October dropped compared to 5.69 million tonnes in September. The country’s imports in September declined after rising for seven months in a row.

China imported 56.25 million tonnes of LNG during January-October, up by 11.5 percent compared to the same period last year, the data shows.

However, Chinese LNG imports fell last year due to due to very high spot LNG prices and Covid lockdowns, which affected economic activity.

LNG imports dropped compared to the January-October period in 2021 when China imported 64.50 million tonnes of LNG.

Including pipeline gas, China’s gas imports rose by 8.8 percent year-on-year to 96.50 million tonnes in January-October.

The country’s pipeline gas imports rose by 1.2 percent in October to 3.62 million tonnes, the data shows.

Japan was the world’s top liquefied natural gas importer in 2022, overtaking China, but both of the countries took fewer volumes when compared to the year before.

However, China has overtaken Japan this year.

Japan’s LNG imports rose by 6.4 percent year-on-year in October to about 5.41 million tonnes

During the January-October period, Japan imported some 54.3 million tonnes, down by about 1.9 million tonnes compared to China’s 56.2 million tonnes.

 

The post China’s LNG imports climb in October appeared first on Energy News Beat.

 

All The Metals We Mined In One Visualization

Energy News Beat

In 2022, 2.8 billion tonnes of metals were mined throughout the world – while major industries that directly consume processed mineral materials contribute 14% of the US economy.

As Visual Capitalist‘s Bruno Venditti details below, here’s each metal’s contribution to the total:

More via Visual Capitalist:

Iron Ore Dominance

Iron ore dominates the metals mining landscape, comprising 93% of the total mined. In 2022, 2.6 billion tonnes of iron ore were mined, containing about 1.6 billion tonnes of iron.

ercentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

Iron ores are found in various geologic environments, such as igneous, metamorphic, or sedimentary rocks, and can contain over 70% iron, with many falling in the 50-60% range.

Combined with other materials like coke and limestone, iron ore is primarily used in steel production. Today, almost all (98%) iron ore is dedicated to steelmaking.

The ore is typically mined in about 50 countries, but Australia, Brazil, China, and India are responsible for 75% of the production.

Because of its essential role in infrastructure development, iron ore is one of the most crucial materials underpinning urbanization and economic growth.

Industrial Metals

Industrial metals occupy the second position on our list, constituting 6.6% of all metals mined in 2022. These metals, including copper, aluminum, lead, and zinc, are employed in construction and industrial applications.

Aluminum constituted nearly 40% of industrial metal production in 2022. China was responsible for 56% of all aluminum produced.

In the second position is chromium, which plays a primary role in rendering stainless steel corrosion-resistant. South Africa led chromium production, accounting for 44% of the total mined last year.

Technology and Precious Metals

Despite representing less than 1% of all the metals mined, technology metals have been on the news over the last few years as countries and companies seek these materials to reduce carbon emissions and improve productivity.

They include lithium and cobalt, used in electric vehicles and battery storage, and rare earths, used in magnets, metal alloys, and electronics. Many of them are considered critical for countries’ security due to their role in clean energy technologies and dependency on other nations to supply domestic demand.

However, despite increasing interest in these metals, they are still behind precious metals such as gold and silver regarding market size.

The gold market, for example, reached $196 billion in 2022, compared to $10.6 billion of the rare earth market.

Loading…

 

The post All The Metals We Mined In One Visualization appeared first on Energy News Beat.

 

Cheney, Kinzinger, And “Sham” J6 Committee Under Fire After Friday Footage Dump; GOP Senator Calls For Investigation

Energy News Beat

Ever since Friday’s release of more than 40,000 hours of Jan. 6 Capitol Police security video, dozens of clips debunking the Jan. 6 committee’s ‘violent insurrection’ narrative have been floating around X.

Mike Lee raises questions

In response to the exculpatory footage that the Jan. 6 committee never showed the American public, Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) has raised significant questions about the handling of security footage.

Lee’s statements directly challenge the integrity of the now-disbanded committee, particularly addressing the roles of its former Republican members, Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger. He also accuses the committee – particularly those two, of selectively sharing information.

After Cheney attempted to hit back with her ‘best hits’ Jan. 6 footage, Lee replied: “Liz, we’ve seen footage like that a million times. You made sure we saw that—and nothing else.”

Lee also called for an investigation into the committee itself, labeling it a “sham” and questioning the use of taxpayer dollars in its operations. He insinuates that crucial information about the committee’s work could have been “deliberately lost or destroyed,” casting doubts on the committee’s transparency and objectivity.

The argument continued throughout the day, with Lee linking to a NY Post article with the headline “FBI lost count of how many paid informants were at Capitol on Jan. 6, and later performed audit to figure out exact number.”

Kinzinger swings and misses all day

In response to the backlash, Kinzinger made a stupid joke comparing Jan. 6 protesters to US army helicopters providing fire for South Vietnamese ground troops attacking the Vietcong in 1965.

Twice.

He also retweeted about a dozen similarly stupid jokes (check out his timeline).

The House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack was disbanded in January 2023, after releasing its final report in December 2022. The committee, comprising seven Democrats and two Republicans, faced criticism for its composition and the perceived partisanship in its approach.

Kinzinger did not seek reelection, and Cheney lost her primary, marking a significant shift in the Republican landscape. The release of the security tapes by Johnson is seen as a step towards transparency, allowing the public to form their own opinions about the events of January 6, away from the committee’s narrative.

Loading…

 

The post Cheney, Kinzinger, And “Sham” J6 Committee Under Fire After Friday Footage Dump; GOP Senator Calls For Investigation appeared first on Energy News Beat.

 

Dutch Central Bank Admits It Has Prepared For A New Gold Standard

Energy News Beat

By Jan Nieuwenhuijs, of Gainesville Coins

In a recent interview the Dutch central bank (DNB) shares it has equalized its gold reserves, relative to GDP, to other countries in the eurozone and outside of Europe. This has been a political decision. If there is a financial crisis the gold price will skyrocket, and official gold reserves can be used to underpin a new gold standard, according to DNB. These statements confirm what I have been writing for the past years about central banks having prepared for a new international gold standard.

Wouldn’t a central bank that has one primary objective—maintaining price stability—serve its mandate best by communicating the currency it issues can be relied upon in all circumstances? By saying gold will be the safe haven of choice during a financial collapse, DNB confesses its own currency (the euro) does not weather all storms. Indirectly, DNB encourages people to own gold to be protected from financial shocks, making the transition towards a gold based monetary system more likely.

How to Prepare for a Gold Standard

In my latest article on this subject—“Europe Has Been Preparing a Global Gold Standard Since the 1970s. Part 2”—I have demonstrated that central banks of medium and large economies in the eurozone have balanced their official gold reserves, proportionally to GDP, to prepare for a gold standard (/gold price targeting system). My analysis was pieced together by scarce quotes from central banks and data of European gold and foreign exchange holdings. My conclusion was that several medium-size economies in Europe (the Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, and Portugal) sold large amounts of gold from the early 1990s to 2008 to come on par with France, Germany, and Italy. I wrote:

Seemingly there are guidelines in the eurozone for national central banks to hold an appropriate amount of gold relative to GDP.

In another article, I revealed that in the early 1990s the People’s Bank of China (PBoC) was buying the gold DNB was selling. By selling gold Europe was allowing developing countries to buy gold and come on par with the West. China too has expressed its desire to bring its gold holdings more in line with the size of its economy, just like the Europeans, and thus to international averages. From Dutch newspaper NRC Handelsblad in 1993:

China announced that it is working to build up its [gold] reserves in order to bring it more in line with the size of Chinese GDP.

The above, and DNB’s most recent confirmation of leveling reserves, implies there are international agreements on the distribution of gold holdings.

Evenly spread gold reserves internationally are a prerequisite for a smooth transition to a gold standard. If some countries own too much and others too little, as was the case in the 1970s, a newly implemented gold standard would prove to be deflationary because the ones with too little gold would have to buy in, pushing up the real price of gold. As long as official gold reserves are evenly spread the nominal gold price can be increased to what is suited for all countries, before introducing a new system.

Another sign of Europe having prepared for a new gold arrangement are the repatriations by several countries. In the eurozone Germany, the Netherlands, France, and Austria repatriated (and redistributed) bullion for security reasons, while keeping a substantial share of their assets in liquid markets such as London. Additionally, Germany, France, and Sweden, that we know of, have upgraded gold bars that didn’t adhere to current wholesale industry standards so now all their metal can be traded instantly.

Last but not least, European central banks’ communication about gold has become unequivocally clear and candid. Stating “gold is the bedrock of stability for the international monetary system” (Germany), “gold is an excellent hedge against adversity” (Italy), “gold is … considered to be the ultimate store of value” (France), and gold “may play a stabilising role … in times of structural changes in the international financial system or deep geopolitical crises” (Hungary). Remarkable statements from entities tasked with guaranteeing financial stability.

Dutch Central Bank Comes Clean on Gold Strategy

When I asked European central banks about a legal requirement to equalize their gold reserves, two of them replied there is no such obligation. Which is strange given the obvious aligning of reserves over the past decades, illustrated in the charts below, and the new comments by DNB.

 

DNB provides an explanation in the aforementioned interview by revealing that their gold policy is set in consultation with its shareholder, the Ministry of Finance of the Netherlands. The idea of balancing gold reserves was first conceived in the 1970s and then executed from the early 1990s until 2008. With no legal requirements for European central banks to balance reserves, the seeds of their actions could be found at their respective governments.

My Freedom of Information (FOI) requests about this subject submitted at DNB have never yielded results because DNB is exempt from such inquiries. This week I have sent FOIs to the Dutch Ministry of Finance to find out what gold policy agreements governments have made internationally. To be continued.

Interview Transcript

The interview with Aerdt Houben, Director of Financial Markets for DNB, was conducted by Anna Dijkman from Het Financieele Dagblad. The following is a translation of the most important part of the conversation (in the first segment we hear Dijkman make a few comments for the listener in between Houben’s talk):

HOUBEN: 612 tonnes of gold. That’s our total holdings. It’s worth about €35 billion euros at the moment and we have diversified it around the world, as a good investor should. We’ve spread it over four locations, with about 30% in the Netherlands, just over 30% in New York at the Federal Reserve, over 20% in Canada and 18% in London.

The gold really goes way back. At the end of the nineteenth century DNB started accumulating gold, which was important to establish confidence in our currency.

DIJKMAN (narrator): The Netherlands was on the gold standard at that time. That means money was backed by gold at the central bank. People could always exchange their banknotes for gold. That lasted until 1936. After World War II, another monetary system based on gold was introduced: Bretton Woods. More than 40 countries agreed with each other that their currencies had a fixed exchange rate against the dollar. The dollar, in turn, could be exchanged for gold at a fixed price.

HOUBEN: The Dutch guilder was actually stable to gold via the dollar. We received dollars when we had surpluses and we lost dollars when we had deficits. And the dollars were redeemable in gold.

DIJKMAN (narrator): Those surpluses and deficits Houben talks about have to do with international trade. The Netherlands, as well as other countries, exported more than it imported and therefore we had a surplus.

HOUBEN: As a result of the surplus our gold reserves increased, or we got more dollars that we converted into gold. We kept asking the Americans, can you convert our dollars into gold? We became owners of gold that was at the Federal Reserve in New York, and it’s still there.

The Americans made losses from their trade relationships. Eventually it was unsustainable for them to lose more and more gold reserves. In 1971, President Nixon announced America’s departure from Bretton Woods. But by then we had over 1,700 tonnes of gold. Yes, we did very well then.

DIJKMAN (narrator): Since the 1970s, gold had no role in the monetary system. But we and other countries had substantial reserves.

HOUBEN: The beauty of gold is that it’s stable in value, it retains its value. That’s one of the reasons why central banks hold gold. Gold has intrinsic value unlike a dollar or any other currency, let alone Bitcoin. Gold has value on its own. It’s a fungible product. It’s a liquid product, you can buy and sell it almost anywhere in the world. So, it’s really an outstanding commodity to base an exchange rate system [gold standard] on.

DIJKMAN: Yet we sold quite a bit of our gold starting in the 1990s. Why?

HOUBEN: Well, I think once you let go of tying your exchange rate to gold, then one of the main reasons for holding that gold is gone. Then you might ask, why are we still holding that gold? Why gold and not a portfolio of stocks or bonds or something else? There are a number of things that make gold very attractive to central banks. Gold is like solidified confidence for the central bank. It’s something that has historically fulfilled that role. If we ever unexpectedly have to create a new currency or a systemic risk arises, the public can have confidence in DNB because whatever money we issue, we can back it with the same value in gold [gold standard].

In the 1970s, and we did that exercise again in the 1980s and 1990s, we looked at how much gold we have and whether that was still in proportion. It’s a kind of an insurance against systemic risk, and the question was to what extent should we continue to insure against this kind of systemic risk? And then we looked at what globally, what other major central banks were doing. We concluded that we owned too much gold. Our stock of gold was then reduced to about the average of the larger gold holding countries in Europe.

DIJKMAN: We do still rank in the top ten, I think globally.

HOUBEN: We are number seven. Yes, in terms of our GDP. Yes, that’s a fine position.

DIJKMAN: So how do you determine what is an appropriate amount then? Because that €35 billion, that doesn’t quite relate to our GDP, does it?

HOUBEN: We have about 4% of our GDP in our gold reserves. And that’s comparable to France, Germany, and Italy.

DIJKMAN: Is that the rule of thumb roughly?

HOUBEN: I think to be very honest there is no optimum, so you can’t determine objectively what is the optimal level of gold reserves. Just like with insurance, because you don’t know when and to what extent a fire is going to occur, and so on. Of course, it also has to do with the shocks of the future, with all kinds of uncertain factors. I think it’s just that we as Dutch people want to be a little bit careful. We think it’s good to have a certain basis of solvency at the central bank invested in gold.

DIJKMAN: Because you could also say if it’s a kind of insurance, for example if the financial system collapses or whatever, shouldn’t you have a lot more?

HOUBEN: You could think that. I think it’s more than enough, because if everything collapses, then the value of those gold reserves shoots up, it skyrockets. Secondly, you don’t have to fully cover it. That’s what experience shows, full coverage is only necessary in a country where there are no other mechanisms to support confidence in the central bank.

DIJKMAN: For example, a country like Canada. I think it has sold all gold. Why did they make that choice?

HOUBEN: Why did Norway put all their oil and gas revenue into a fund and not run it into the government’s budget like the Netherlands did? Those are choices that were made politically. I do think that is an important point to make here. This is not a choice that DNB makes alone. This is in consultation with our shareholder. And that is of course the Ministry of Finance, with whom we are in close consultation about our balance sheet and the risks we bear. And also the gold reserves, which are part of that.

Read more about the international gold market from the author:

Estimated World Official Gold Holdings Reach Record HighHow Central Banks Can Use Gold Revaluation Accounts in Times of Financial StressZoltan Pozsar, the Four Prices of Money, and the Coming Gold Bull MarketPBoC in a Hurry to Buy Gold: Covertly Bought 593t of Gold YTDEstimated Chinese Official Gold Reserves Cross 5,000 TonnesThe Shanghai International Gold Exchange and Its Role in De-Dollarization

Loading…

The post Dutch Central Bank Admits It Has Prepared For A New Gold Standard appeared first on Energy News Beat.

 

Pakistan launches tender for one spot LNG cargo

Energy News Beat

State-owned Pakistan LNG has released a tender inviting firms to submit bids for one spot LNG shipment for delivery in January.

Pakistan LNG is seeking one 140,000 cbm cargo on a delivered ex-ship (DES) basis and the delivery window is January 8-9, 2024, according to a document released on November 20.

Also, the potential tender winner will deliver the cargo to the FSRU BW Integrity serving Pakistan GasPort’s terminal in Port Qasim, Karachi, or the Energo Elengy facility.

The tender closes on November 24.

Prior to this tender, Pakistan LNG received offers from traders Trafigura and Vitol for two spot cargoes with deliveries on December 7-8 and December 13-14.

Trafigura was the only firm to submit an offer for the delivery on December 13-14 and it offered a price of $19.3900/MMBtu.

Vitol offered the lowest price of 15.9700/MMBtu for the December 7-8 delivery.

Media reports suggested that Pakistan LNG decided only to accept the offer from Vitol for the December 7-8 delivery.

Pakistan gets most of its supplies under long-term contracts from Qatar and on the spot market, however, last year prices surged and Europe took most of the available spot supplies.

In July this year, Pakistan also signed a one-year deal to buy one LNG cargo per month from Azerbaijan’s Socar.

GIIGNL data shows that Pakistan’s LNG imports dropped by 16 percent to 6.91 million tons last year due to high prices.

The country imported almost all of these volumes under long-term contracts from Qatar, or some 6.10 million tons, the data shows.

Spot prices dropped considerably this year, prompting Pakistan and other Asian countries such as Bangladesh to return to buying spot LNG.

JKM for January is currently below $17/MMBtu.

 

The post Pakistan launches tender for one spot LNG cargo appeared first on Energy News Beat.

 

Commentary: Despite Maine defeat, public power still on the agenda in the U.S.

Energy News Beat

This commentary was submitted by Holly Caggiano, Ph.D., assistant professor in the School of Community and Regional Planning at the University of British Columbia, and Sara Constantino, Ph.D., assistant professor in the Psychology Department and the School of Public Policy and Urban Affairs at Northeastern University. See our commentary guidelines for more information.

After paying our monthly utility bills, most of us take for granted the complex network of infrastructure and institutions that keep the lights on. This is changing. The average monthly electricity bill for residential customers nationally increased 13% from 2021 to 2022, rising from $121 to $137 a month, while climate change and aging and mismanaged electrical infrastructure have contributed to a string of disastrous wildfires. Confronted with rising costs of living and the urgent need to protect the environment, people across the country are taking a serious look at how their utilities are owned and operated. 

Electric utilities, which can act as generators, distributors and/or service providers, play a key role in the transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy. For decades, a small number of for-profit, investor-owned utilities (IOUs) have powered most of the country. On November 7th, Maine challenged this model with Ballot Question 3, The Pine Tree Power initiative, proposing a transformation of the state’s two largest IOUs into a non-profit, democratically-managed public utility. 

Before the vote, the Washington Post dubbed Maine the “epicenter” of the nation’s growing anger with electric utilities. Customer approval ratings of Central Maine Power (CMP) and Versant–the state’s two largest IOUs, owned by parent companies in Spain and Canada–are among the lowest in the country, but Maine is just one of an increasing number of states where people are raising concerns. Groups across the country have called for public takeover of IOUs, claiming investors prioritize profit over system maintenance, disregard consumer safety, and delay climate action. 

While many IOUs have embraced climate action on paper, their actions say otherwise. One recent study found that electric utilities have pushed climate delay, doubt, and denial over multiple decades, promoting messaging explicitly designed to absolve inaction. Reporting also reveals widespread corruption and attempts to halt regulation to encourage clean energy and reduce ratepayer costs. Climate activism group 350.org labeled CMP one of the biggest anti-climate lobbyists in Maine. 

IOUs have also been implicated in destructive and deadly wildfires. Hawaiian Electric Company recently acknowledged responsibility for the Maui wildfires—they failed to shut off power despite high winds and dry conditions. California’s PG&E narrowly avoided a trial on manslaughter charges for their role in the 2020 Zogg fire that killed four. IOUs know that the public is worried by their questionable safety records, responding with expensive PR campaigns. These tactics come from an old playbook. In The Big Myth, Erik M. Conway and Naomi Oreskes describe 1920s propaganda campaigns to push privatization that ushered in higher rates for homeowners and bigger profits for corporations. A century later, we’re back to questioning this model. 

Private utilities in Maine spent millions lobbying against the ballot initiative and the governor was vocally opposed. We ran a survey with the Climate and Community Project to learn more about how Mainers were feeling in the lead up to the vote. We found that Mainers are overwhelmingly concerned about keeping the lights on, with 88% of respondents very or somewhat worried about current and future energy costs. And despite the lobbying efforts of the private utilities, most respondents believe that their utilities should be locally owned and operated (55%) and not-for-profit (66%).

While these sentiments weren’t reflected in the election results, the reasons are nuanced. Our data suggests that many Mainers weren’t rejecting public-ownership itself, but were looking for a more fully realized plan, citing ambiguities about how the takeover would be financed, if costs would be passed to consumers, and if it would hold up in court—67% of our respondents thought it was somewhat or very likely that Pine Tree would face legal and regulatory challenges. 

Despite investor-owned utilities pouring money into campaigns to oppose public power, there is growing momentum to reconsider how our power systems are owned and operated. One recent success is New York’s Build Public Renewables Act, which passed into law in May. After four years of organizing by Public Power NY, a coalition of more than twenty community organizations, the law authorizes the New York Power Authority to build renewable energy projects that help meet the state’s climate goals and include strong labor standards. Municipalization of utilities is also a hot topic in Western states, with ongoing organizing in California and Texas

Some supporters of the Pine Tree Power campaign hoped that a win would fuel more initiatives across the country. In our poll, 41% of respondents thought it was somewhat or very likely that if passed, Pine Tree Power would spark a larger cross-state movement towards public ownership of energy resources. Despite Mainers choosing to stick with their current model for now, the ballot initiative brought national attention to the issue and has encouraged many to question the status quo. Rather than signaling the end of the road for public power in Maine, this vote could be the beginning of a sustained conversation about transforming our utilities. The research, organizing and discussions that went into the Pine Tree campaign provide a foundation for future efforts to improve the service, safety and sustainability of our energy infrastructure—and start to shift the energy narrative about what is possible, and desirable. 

In Maine, we saw how the movement for public power united people across demographic and party lines. Rural or urban, Democrat or Republican, we all deserve access to clean, affordable, and reliable electricity. Climate change is forcing us to reconsider how we produce energy but it doesn’t need to stop there. This is an opportunity to reimagine who owns energy infrastructure and whose interests it serves. 

 

The post Commentary: Despite Maine defeat, public power still on the agenda in the U.S. appeared first on Energy News Beat.

 

Critics say Indiana utility is ‘backsliding’ on clean energy goals with planned gas plant

Energy News Beat

Northern Indiana Public Service Co. is planning to build a 400-megawatt natural gas-fired power plant that critics say is unnecessary, out of step with clean energy goals, and happening outside the usual planning process. 

In September, the utility asked the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission for a needed certificate of public convenience and necessity to build the $643 million peaker plant on the site of the retiring R.M. Schahfer coal plant in Jasper County in central Indiana.

The utility, known as NIPSCO, says it needs the plant to provide power during times of high demand, since it will be phasing out coal by 2028 and transitioning to renewables. 

“Energy from renewable resources does not follow the load,” David Walter, NIPSCO vice president for power delivery, testified before the commission. “In order to have generation available when the load is there but sufficient energy from renewable resources is not, it is critical to have sufficient fast-starting, quick-ramping dispatchable generation,” meaning the natural gas plant.

NIPSCO also says the plant could be converted to run on natural gas blended with hydrogen — a fuel being pushed by the U.S. Department of Energy, including with the recent funding of regional hydrogen hubs. 

Groups with intervenor status — including Citizens Action Coalition and the Industrial Group of NIPSCO customers — are in the process of filing testimony about the proposed gas plant, due Dec. 12.

Just Transition Northwest Indiana legislative director Susan Thomas said the organization “is actively opposing this build-out of what will most likely be only an occasional-use facility that either prolongs the use of fossil fuels for another 50 years or will be rendered obsolete due to more stringent climate regulations in the future.”

Currently, NIPSCO’s generation mix is 43% coal, 26% natural gas, 17% solar and 15% wind. In its 2018 integrated resource plan, NIPSCO proposed to close all its coal plants by 2028, and keep running its existing Sugar Creek natural gas plant. 

NIPSCO told the commission in recent testimony that by 2028, it expects to get 31% of its capacity from natural gas-fired power, 13% from wind and 55% from solar plus storage. 

NIPSCO’s 2021 integrated resource plan called for 300 MW of natural gas. In its September filing, NIPSCO said that the proposal for a 400-megawatt gas plant is based on a recent analysis including “market shifts” since 2021, like rule changes in the MISO wholesale market and passage of the Inflation Reduction Act.

“They’re backsliding off their 2018 commitment,” is how Thomas sees it.

NIPSCO had originally planned to retire two units of the Schahfer coal plant in 2023, but had to extend to 2025 because of delays in getting planned solar online, it told the commission. Two more units at Schahfer are scheduled to close by 2028, and existing gas-fired peaking units at that site are scheduled to close in 2026. NIPSCO’s Michigan City coal plant is scheduled to close by 2026. 

Citizens Action Coalition program director Ben Inskeep noted that NIPSCO has another integrated resource plan due next fall. He said that process would be the appropriate place to explore and explain the need for new gas peaker capacity, offering more chances for public scrutiny and input.

“We’ve had great dialogue with them in the [integrated resource planning] stakeholder process in the past; they’ve been receptive to feedback,” Inskeep said. “One of the sad parts about this proceeding is it’s a step backwards in the process with them; it kind of breaks trust when you have an understanding about how things will operate and you’ve been successful, and then they’ve gone outside the process to come up with a different answer.” 

Walter told the commission that NIPSCO could not wait to launch the gas plant request during the 2024 integrated resource planning process, since that would delay plant construction “until late 2027 at the earliest,” while the company said it needs the capacity by 2026. 

Advocates say that rather than constructing a natural gas plant to fill gaps in renewable generation, NIPSCO could buy power from the MISO wholesale market, while also reducing energy needs through demand response and energy efficiency programs. 

Inskeep said the math behind the gas plant proposal is especially tricky given that it depends on both wholesale power prices in the future, and natural gas prices, for NIPSCO to supply its own plant. Natural gas prices have been particularly volatile over time, severely impacted by things like the fracking boom and the Ukraine-Russia war. 

“They’re saying that additional capacity will give them the ability to basically buy less electricity from the MISO wholesale power market, an insurance mechanism so they’re not buying wholesale energy during the few hours of the year when the solar and wind they are building might not be operating,” Inskeep said. “Whether this resource meets the cost-benefit analysis is unclear to me. Is it really going to make the gas plant worth it, even if you don’t take into consideration the climate change and local pollution impacts?” 

Opponents are also worried that NIPSCO is for the first time proposing to construct the plant itself, hiring individual contractors rather than hiring one firm to oversee the entire process. 

“They’ve never built a plant on their own, but now they’re going to freelance this,” Thomas said. “Where will there be transparency in this process? The potential for cost overruns is rampant.” 

Under Indiana law, a company can bill ratepayers for a “construction work in progress,” long before it is “used and useful,” the usual standard for recouping cost and a profit from ratepayers. 

Kevin Blissmer, regulatory manager for NIPSCO’s parent company, testified to the commission that this arrangement actually saves ratepayers money, since they are paying costs upfront rather than later, including costs the company took on to finance its investment. Blissmer said billing ratepayers while construction is ongoing would mean a difference of $149 million in financing savings over the project’s life. 

But the Citizens Action Coalition website describes the group’s concerns with construction work in progress, saying it “converts consumers into involuntary investors, placing the burden of up front financing costs onto them. The costs end up on their bills sooner, before they ever receive electricity from the plant in question, and there is little recourse should the costs skyrocket or the project be abandoned.” 

In July, NIPSCO announced its first two Indiana solar farms are operating: a 265-megawatt solar farm in Jasper County, not far from the Schahfer coal plant, and a 200-megawatt array in White County. In April, NIPSCO signed a power purchase agreement with a 198-megawatt wind farm in Jasper County. 

In its September filing, NIPSCO said the gas plant meets the state 21st Century Energy Policy Development Task Force’s recommended five pillars, helping to ensure reliability and resiliency, stability, affordability, and environmental sustainability. 

But Inskeep called building the gas plant on the retiring coal plant site a “missed opportunity,” since it precludes the chance to put wind and solar on the site and utilize the existing grid interconnections, without having to go through the otherwise lengthy process to interconnect new solar and wind to MISO’s grid. 

Clean energy advocates have also asked NIPSCO to focus on reducing peak demand rather than building more generation.

“Solutions are there and available,” Thomas said. “We’re not even giving those solutions a fair chance. They should have considered energy storage, demand response or purchase from the MISO market before they did this.”

 

The post Critics say Indiana utility is ‘backsliding’ on clean energy goals with planned gas plant appeared first on Energy News Beat.