Speaker Johnson Releases Jan. 6 Videos To The Public

Energy News Beat

By Joseph M. Hanneman of Epoch Times

More than 40,000 hours of Jan. 6 Capitol Police security video will be made public on a dedicated website starting immediately and ramping up in the coming months, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) announced on Nov. 17.

However, individual video clips released to media or other requesters will have the faces of identifiable individuals blurred, a senior congressional aide told The Epoch Times. That restriction drew immediate fire from some Jan. 6 criminal case defendants.

“So while we are significantly expanding the amount of clips that will be available and who can request them, we will be blurring faces with respect to individuals who are identifiable,” the source said.

“To restore America’s trust and faith in their government we must have transparency,” Johnson wrote on X.com. “This is another step towards keeping the promises I made when I was elected to be your Speaker.”

The Committee on House Administration’s Subcommittee on Oversight, chaired by Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), has already posted 90 hours of Capitol security video in the online viewing room. The initial release includes footage previously provided to various media outlets.

“The goal of our investigation has been to provide the American people with transparency on what happened at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, and this includes all official video from that day,” Mr. Loudermilk said in a statement. “We will continue loading video footage as we conduct our investigation and continue to review footage.”

More videos will be added to the public site on “a rolling basis,” the source said.

“By current estimates, there are roughly 40,000 hours that we will be making public over the next few months as quickly as we can,” the congressional aide said.

Some video will be withheld if it is deemed “security sensitive” or if it could “potentially provide a roadmap for doxxing and harassing private individuals,” the aide said.

Beginning on Nov. 20, members of the public will also be able to view footage on terminals in the committee’s offices on Capitol Hill, the source said.

Those wishing to view the video at committee offices will have to request a time slot by emailing [email protected].

In-person viewing on the congressional video terminals offers advantages over the online viewing room. In-person viewers can select individual cameras from an interactive Capitol map and narrow the footage by timeframe.

The in-person system has maps for each level of the Capitol. The Capitol grounds are separated into zones, with the camera locations indicated by small icons. Viewers can access the entire database, whereas the online viewing room will be stocked with tranches of footage on a rolling basis.

The announcement came amid mounting pressure from the public and Jan. 6 defendants to get access to the security video. Former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) earlier this year said he would release Jan. 6 video footage, but that commitment never resulted in the public getting direct access.

The viewing room setup and the plans to blur faces on video clips given to media or the public drew some fire on social media.

“Releasing batches of J6 CCTV is merely a way for Congress to pretend they are making the tapes public while holding back important footage they will ‘someday’ get to us in a ‘future’ batch,” Will Pope, a Jan. 6 defendant, wrote on X. “They gave it ALL to the FBI in January 2021! Americans deserve it ALL in one batch, too!”

Mr. Pope said blurring the faces of those shown in the downloadable videos will erode public trust. He called the Nov. 17 announcement a “publicity stunt.”

“Americans will never trust blurred and edited J6 footage,” he wrote.

Some commenters on social media asked how they can be sure the files posted online have not been altered.

During a Spaces online meeting on X, several of the more than 800 participants said they expect Google and YouTube to censor not only news about the Jan. 6 video releases but also any video clips people try to upload to social media. Others said they do not understand why the online viewing room does not have a download function.

Congressional sources said the public can request downloadable videos based on their research, but all clips are subject to committee approval and will be processed to blur the faces of identifiable persons.

Earlier this year The Epoch Times gained access to the Capitol Police database of nearly 1,700 cameras for Jan. 5 and 6. Based on research done on video terminals on Capitol Hill, the newspaper requested and was given dozens of individual clips that were used in the special report The Jan. 6 Tapes.

https://twitter.com/amuse/status/1725713948547133881

Loading…

 

The post Speaker Johnson Releases Jan. 6 Videos To The Public appeared first on Energy News Beat.

 

Daily Energy Standup Episode #254 – Weekly Recap: Iran’s Oil Surge, EV Charging Challenges, and Global Dynamics Unveiled

Energy News Beat

Daily Standup Weekly Top Stories

Explainer: Iran’s expanding oil trade with top buyer China

Nov 10 (Reuters) – China’s oil imports from Iran have hit record highs as Iran ramps up output despite the threat of further U.S. sanctions. Existing sanctions were implemented over Iran’s nuclear programme, and U.S. […]

Oil and gas ‘not the problem’ for climate, says UK’s net zero minister

Oil and gas are “not the problem” for the climate, but the carbon emissions arising from them are, the UK’s net zero minister has told MPs. In words that suggested the UK could place yet […]

China LNG deals come at an environmental cost

China’s LNG deal-making has been gaining momentum, even amid international calls to pull back on gas development due to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and methane leakage problems. Chinese gas importers have increased long-term LNG contracts with both Qatar and […]

Top LNG importer China re-selling more cargoes, eyes trading gains

China, the world’s top importer of liquefied natural gas (LNG), is increasingly re-selling some of the super-chilled fuel to other Asian buyers as it looks to profit from price swings. Armed with a growing portfolio […]

PG&E files extension to keep Diablo Canyon operational

Pacific Gas & Electric has officially filed its relicensing application with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to extend operation at the Diablo Canyon power plant for another 20 years. The multi-year process will not hinder the […]

Exxon to start lithium production for EVs in the US by 2027

HOUSTON, Nov 13 (Reuters) – Exxon Mobil (XOM.N) said on Monday it plans to start producing lithium from subsurface wells by 2027 to provide supplies of the key metal used in electric-car batteries and advanced electronics. Oil […]

I Visited Over 120 EV Chargers: Three Reasons Why So Many Were Broken

Los Angeles County has more public electric-vehicle fast chargers than any other in the country. WSJ’s Joanna Stern hit up 30 charging locations in a Rivian R1T and ran into problems at 40% of them. […]

Highlights of the Podcast

00:00 – Intro
01:06 – Explainer: Iran’s expanding oil trade with top buyer China
03:33 – Oil and gas ‘not the problem’ for climate, says UK’s net zero minister
05:52 – China LNG deals come at an environmental cost
08:09 – Top LNG importer China re-selling more cargoes, eyes trading gains
10:16 – PG&E files extension to keep Diablo Canyon operational
13:41 – Exxon to start lithium production for EVs in the US by 2027
16:49 – I Visited Over 120 EV Chargers: Three Reasons Why So Many Were Broken
19:58 – Outro

Follow Stuart On LinkedIn and Twitter

Follow Michael On LinkedIn and Twitter

ENB Top News

ENB

Energy Dashboard

ENB Podcast

ENB Substack

– Get in Contact With The Show –

Video Transcription edited for grammar. We disavow any errors unless they make us look better or smarter.

Michael Tanner: [00:00:14] What’s going on? Everybody, welcome to a special edition of the Daily Energy News beat Standup here on this gorgeous Saturday, November 18th, 2023. As always, I’m your humble correspondent, Michael Tanner, coming from an undisclosed location here in Dallas, Texas, bringing you our weekly recap. As always, I hope you guys are having a great weekend. Always love this episode. We’ve got a lot to cover this week at two solo shows. I’m from Stu and myself. I’m only had two full shows that we shot Monday, Tuesday, a lot of great segments. Guys, I’m going to leave it up to the weekly recap for the team right now. Before we do that guys, again, www.energynewsbeat.com. The best place for all of your energy news Tip of the spear when it comes to the energy business, doing the team do a great job of curating that website. Check us out again. Email the show [email protected] Subscribe Rate and Review YouTube, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you get your podcast. Appreciate you guys. I’m going to leave it up to the weekly recap. We’ll see you Monday, folks. [00:01:05][50.8]

Stuart Turley: [00:01:06] Iran’s Expanding oil Trade with top buyer China. Michael. This one has got some stats in it that I didn’t know. And the existing sanctions, we know the Bidens have not you know, they’ve they’ve not enforce them. How much Iranian oil is China Buying is a huge thing. Tehran’s October output edged up to 3.17 million barrels per day. That’s net when Trump was in power, it was less than 500,000. Now that, you know, the Bidens have ignored it and just no st no enforcement for you. 3.17 and China’s imports are 1.45 million barrels per day from Iran. That’s net it seems nice. It’s a little bit less. Now. Here’s how does Iranian oil enter China? Michael Stews Dark Fleet lives except for two cargoes. December 20, 21 and January 22. China’s customs has not recorded any direct imports from Iran since December 2020. Then turn, turn. If anybody wanted to ask about how important Stu’s dark fleet is, there you go. [00:02:33][87.9]

Michael Tanner: [00:02:34] Well, no, in in, in. That is what again, you’ve been you’ve been on this for years now, so don’t hurt yourself. Patent yourself on the back. But it really comes down to measuring. The EIA and the IAEA aren’t looking at the dark fleet. So when they go and talk to you about demand, forecast estimates are, oh, something’s new, data is dropping here that we need to cover. What they’re lacking. Lacking is an understanding of exactly what this article is talking about. Except for two cargoes. China’s customs has not recorded direct imports from Iran since December 2020. And then that’s not. [00:03:07][32.5]

Stuart Turley: [00:03:07] Oh, yeah. So, you know, the the dark Fleet. And that’s why I think the energy news beat is such a great website and resources because if you look at all of the sources across the world, you can’t just go with one source. You can’t listen to the IEA or the EIA or even Biden or Republicans. You can’t listen to any you know, you got to have multiple sources. Hey, let’s go to the next one here. We’re going to fly over to the UK now. Oil and gas, not the problem for climate, says the UK’s net zero minister. This is pretty amazing. This falls on the grounds of the Prime Minister and the head cabana. What was it a month ago when he said he’s going to delay the transition to Eve and then was now about all these heads were going nuts And then that started the whole that that to me was one of the I think the catalyst. Everybody was realizing it. Now, this guy, Graham Stewart, I like his name. Graham Stuart said fossil fuel production was not driving climate change, but demand for fossil fuel was poor. Oil and gas are not the problem, but the carbon emission arising from them are. Now this guy is. I thought it was okay. It’s a play of words. If you really care about climate change, the last country you need to worry about is the UK. We’re not the problem. It’s encouraging others. Here’s the thing. It’s the hypocrisy that this brings out, and that is everybody, all of the climate protesters that are out there, I would love to see them not film themselves using their iPhones that require oil and gas in order to produce those things. So what are they going to use? [00:05:01][113.6]

Michael Tanner: [00:05:03] Yeah, I mean, it’s it’s it would be pretty hard to protest oil and gas without using any products that come from oil and gas. So, you know, you basically stand out there naked and get a wave around a tree branch. I don’t know. [00:05:16][13.2]

Stuart Turley: [00:05:16] But it would be pretty funny. 80 countries call for the phase out at COP 27. Now they’re trying to make the same demand at COP 28 and a couple of weeks in Dubai. I can’t wait for the circus in a couple weeks. At COP 28, I mean, you got minister. You get everybody from Dubai coming in there. You got everybody from Saudi Arabia. And I know that Kerry is going to go in there and nobody’s going to want to talk to him because the U.S. has lost so much global prestige. China LNG deal comes at an environmental cost. This is kind of funny, actually, Michael, just before I get into this, think about it. LNG is gas. Liquefaction of natural gas goes to a ship. That ship then chugs around the world and then gets declassified and then put into pipes. So let’s there’s a lot of transportation going on with that natural gas. Chinese gas importers have increased long term contracts with both Qatar and the U.S. by 50% since 2020 to both contracts, 40 million tons per year. That is a lot of LNG traveling around the oceans. Here’s where it gets pretty wild. It shot up 72,000 and 800 million cubic meters. Wow. They are expected to contract LNG supply for more than 100 mtpa by 2026. That’s nuts. Let’s come in here. The CO2 emissions. This is a quote down here from a carbon brief report. China. CO2 emissions are still increasing and we have returned to record levels. Really? It’s because all them coal plants that they’re putting in. [00:07:17][120.5]

Michael Tanner: [00:07:18] Exactly. I love this. This quote by LNG analyst Rob Rozanski. He’s from the Global Energy Monitor. I mean, this guy really gets paid to dig to give quotes like this. Switching from coal to natural gas probably improves local air quality, but gas fired power still produces harmful emissions linked to health impacts and premature deaths. I swear that guy got paid a salary to say that quote, That’s unbelievable. Signed me up. [00:07:42][24.4]

Stuart Turley: [00:07:42] Still. Oh, absolutely. And then factoring in the entire LNG lifecycle with methane gas leaks through the entire cycle, LNG chain and since methane is such a powerful greenhouse gas emitter, LNG has an outsized climate impact. That was from Rozanski. I got tickled at this one. Produce locally. You don’t have to ship around the world and become energy independent. [00:08:09][26.5]

Michael Tanner: [00:08:09] China on now becoming the largest importer of LNG. Looks like they’re doing some crazy stuff with it. [00:08:15][5.5]

Stuart Turley: [00:08:16] They’re doing the old shell game on as bad Doug would. Chinese customs data. There are some big numbers in here. Michael shows that they reloaded. 617,000 metric tons of imported LNG during the nine months of this year compared with the 576,000 tons. And here’s where it gets funny. It comes down into here. We need to pull all the levers when it comes to managing market swings, says Zheng. Yogi Bless You picks up PTI, global head of LNG, told Reuters. Here it comes down into here. China’s LNG receiving capacity is expected to expand 30% to nearly 182 million tonnes annually by 2025 from £139 million this year. Now here’s where it gets a little funny, is that they’re trading gas shipments and I think that this is actually a let me find the quote numbers in here. South Korea has been taking 27% of China’s reloads and it’s even been going to Europe. I’m trying to find where that number it was buried in here. Anyway, China is getting the orders and then shipping them off somewhere else. [00:09:40][84.2]

Michael Tanner: [00:09:41] Well, because as as as Zheng Yao, the global head of LNG, pointed out, you know, this is using these financial derivatives and developing infrastructure like regasification terminals and underground storage, help offset market volatility and improve overall supplies. So they’re doing things that, quite frankly, the U.S. should be doing, which was using their massive amount of infrastructure to obtain energy security at home. So as much as I’d love to hate China for this, they’re doing it. In order to keep energy prices low at home. So. Oh, absolutely. You know, don’t hate the player. Hate the game. [00:10:16][34.3]

Stuart Turley: [00:10:16] Agony. Any files and extension to keep Diablo Canyon operational. I find it funny that this was filed when President Z from China has come in. Oh, a miss producer. Can you fly in this thing here and let me get the hour? I found this on Twitter and I found it very interesting. This is from I want to give a Chuck Cohen a shout out and it’s before Z. And this is San Francisco with the homeless. You see the normal homeless after they ran through like goons beating the homeless and cleaning them up. Just like in Princess Bride when they went, I need my goon squad to clean everything up. They did. Okay, now, this is going to be the same thing, Michael. Here they are. They have lousy energy policies. President G shows up, and they’re going to add 20 years to Diablo Canyon. When? Michael, you and I were covering it. Two years ago, they were shutting it down. All we have to do is get president z to tour the united states. Chicago would be cleaned up. New York would be cleaned up. This would be huge. I’m a G. Fan. All of a sudden, since he can get California cleaned up just by showing up. This multiyear Diablo Canyon is just unbelievable. PG And he’s committed to answering the state’s call to ensure continued operation at the facility and safely delivered affordable, reliable and clean energy, said Patty Pope in a press release. She has to be our Person of the Week. [00:12:03][106.8]

Michael Tanner: [00:12:04] Yeah, I mean, you have to remember, for all of the flaws that we are forced down our throat from Diablo Canyon. Oh, it’s so bad. It’s so bad. It’s doing 10% of the state’s electrical supply is nothing to sneeze at. [00:12:15][11.4]

Stuart Turley: [00:12:15] No, it’s not an edge. Delivering less carbon than all of the oil that’s coming in from China’s wells out of the rainforest 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 rain or shine. I mean, I love me and you know. [00:12:35][19.4]

Michael Tanner: [00:12:35] You love it. And we do need we just need to g to take a tour of the United States. And it had me tickled. And then did you see me not to sidetrack, but I saw a clip today of Newsom saying, well, hey, I know a lot of you think we just cleaned up the streets because President G is here and he’s like, Wow. It’s true. It’s true. But we also did it because it was just he straight up just he admitted it. [00:13:00][24.6]

Stuart Turley: [00:13:00] What did you do? You remember when Biden made his first 15 minute drive by at the at the border, the border town? It was a wreck. They did the same thing. They brought the Princess Bride goon squad through, cleaned it up. You couldn’t find an illegal immigrant to save your life around the goon squad. And President Biden walked around with his bag. It depends under his arm, looking around, going, There’s no border crisis. Oh, just bring Biden and Z on a world tour around the U.S. and we would have no problem. [00:13:37][37.0]

Michael Tanner: [00:13:38] A world tour around the U.S.. I absolutely love it. [00:13:41][3.2]

Stuart Turley: [00:13:41] So let’s go ahead and transition over to Exxon. This is an outstanding story. When we take a look at the energy transition and the demand for the lithium for the lithium batteries, this is huge. And they are projecting that they can start producing lithium, Exxon, by 2027. The U.S. oil majors are investing in the electric ification sector as governments in the United States and Europe set programs to promote wider use of electric vehicles. While in the long term, lithium is really a global opportunity, said Dan Mann, president of Exxon’s Low carbon business Unit. We are starting here because there’s an urgent need to ramp up domestic production with these critical minerals. Let’s talk about some of this is goal would require $2 billion in capital expenditures to provide 50,000 tons at a volume. It could generate $800 million in cash. That doesn’t seem like a very good 2 billion capital expenditures in order to generate 800 million in potential cash, unless there is subsidies in here and unless there is long term contracts. The other part of this article is very critical. European oil rivals BP Shell have invested in the. Charging stations is part of their transition strategy. But BP and Shell and even total energy, as we talked about, total energy is just bought enough natural gas plants or is in the process of buying them In Texas, that is equivalent of two nuclear reactors. And when you take a look at the difference of the European big oil companies, they went 100% going to beyond petroleum, as in BP’s case, instead of maintaining their balance like the U.S.. The Exxon’s of the world stayed their course and then Oxy took it to carbon capture. So now Exxon, which invented the rechargeable lithium battery in the seventies, I did not know, then stepped away from the technology, has no and plans to invest in the charging stations. I thought that was pretty critical. Stay in your lane and this is very, very important. There are 280 million vehicles in the U.S. today and fewer than 3 million are these. There’s still 99% to go, which is a huge opportunity. So the headwinds for this project, A, I applauded the headwinds are going to be is the EV market going to be sustainable without the consumers being excited about it And or are the subsidies going to have to kick in? Stay tuned. We’re going to try to get a crayon on this with Michael and be back with you on this as well. [00:16:48][186.7]

Michael Tanner: [00:16:49] I visited over 120 EV chargers. Three reasons why so many were broken. This is, again, from the Wall Street Journal. I want to try to find the author here. It was a lady she wrote it on here. Either way. Oh, Joanna Stern. Okay. So she went ahead in Los Angeles and hit up 30 fast charging locations or public electric vehicle, fast charging locations in Los Angeles County. She did that in a rivian r1t and found that 40% of them had problems. So this is in public. The Chargers clearly not working out. You know, she says it’s a Ford Mustang Mach-e driver. I’m no stranger to these frustrations. Many of you have shared your charging horror stories and me since I began my EV adventure. So let’s go ahead and dive into this. They visited 30 EV charging stations, 13 of whom had issues. Here was the first problem. Some of them were just flat out of order. So of the 126 stalls that she inspected, 27 of them were out of order. They either had a sign I’m a dead screen ordered air, a reading, a test charger unavailable. A producer can can fly that in their charger unavailable out of service. Caution. Sorry. Out of service. Not good. All of these companies told me that they have network operators currently monitoring them. 24 seven And when problems pop up, they deploy technicians to assess and fix the issues of what was wrong with these particular machines. Could be one of many things. The key is it takes a while to get that turned around. Solution. I love how they always try to put a solution here. New gear is needed, obviously better gear that works. This is my favorite problem to paint it, reject it. You get it all worked out, but you can’t swipe your credit card. Technology has been around for decades. We can’t figure out how to get it on EVs. It’s just hilarious. What’s the solution? Upgrade the apps. Genius. Genius. Finally, the third one this is interesting and I think is is one of the reasons why scaling EVs from a regulatory standpoint might be necessary is the handshake failure, which is basically the connection to you and your EV to the fast charging doesn’t quite work for whatever reason. It could be a software issue, it could be a timeout, it could be a bunch of different things. To the point is you can get it connected. You pull up, it takes your car, but boom, it’s not transferring. And I mentioned this may be where in order to push some of this stuff forward, there needs to be a little bit of I don’t want to say government regulation, but in agreement among makers, can we create a single plug and play charger? I know that they’re working on it, but some people have different combinations. There’s the combined charging system that’s integrated into most non Tesla promises. Tesla is different, but most of non Tesla EVs including the Rivian, require a quick handshake. It basically it’s this new combines and so they’re working on it. It all comes back to the point we are really far away from EV rollouts and people want to go quickly and phase out gas vehicles when 14 I promise you 14% of gas stations are not offline. I just promise you that. So this is again, people talk about EVs don’t work. Well, the problem is that there’s a lot of downstream issues when it comes to EVs. Obviously, we’ve covered extensively the grid, but really this EV charges players 120 EV chargers, 40% of them out of work. Great work. Got to love it happened. [00:16:49][0.0][982.6]

– Get in Contact With The Show –

The post Daily Energy Standup Episode #254 – Weekly Recap: Iran’s Oil Surge, EV Charging Challenges, and Global Dynamics Unveiled appeared first on Energy News Beat.

 

Why oil majors Shell and BP are combining solar energy and agricultural production

Energy News Beat

At Elm Branch Solar Farm, about an hour south of Dallas, Texas, a flock of sheep grazes among a vast field of solar panels. The flock’s shepherd, Amanda Stoffels, watches over it as the sheep munch on the grass and nap in the shade provided by the panels.

Stoffels owns this land, but leases it to Lightsource BP, a major solar energy developer that’s 50% owned by British oil major BP. She earns a steady monthly income from the lease payments as well as through her grazing contract with Lightsource, which pays her to graze her sheep around the panels, thereby keeping vegetation in check.

“It’s a new, modern approach to agriculture,” Stoffels says. Her contracts with Lightsource allowed her to quit her 9 to 5 job to become a full-time shepherd.

An emerging industry called agrivoltaics combines solar energy production with agricultural activities such as sheep grazing, beekeeping and crop growing. This land management strategy could help alleviate the tension between farmers and solar developers, groups that often have competing land-use interests.

“Even though the United States is a very large country with a lot of available land, every single square inch of land is either owned, protected or cherished by someone or many people. And many people do not want to see that land change or transform into something different from what it has been,” explained Jordan Macknick, the Lead Energy-Water-Land Analyst for the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

Agrivoltaic projects, Macknick says, could be a sort of compromise. “So agrivoltaics really offers us that opportunity to continue farming, continue doing these agricultural activities while also producing clean electricity.”

Amanda Stoffels feeds her flock of sheep at Elm Branch Solar Farm in Ellis County, Texas. Stoffels earns money by leasing her land to solar developer Lightsource BP and grazing her sheep around the panels.

Crop growing on solar farms is still a nascent area of research and some farmers still have concerns.

“Solar takes some of the best land out of production because they want land that’s 1% to 4% slope,” explained Tom Koranek, a landowner and beekeeper who leases land to Lightsource and produces honey on the solar farm. That flat, treeless land is ideal for both solar panels and crop production, he says.

Still, agrivoltaic projects are as close to a win-win for farmers and solar developers as we currently have, and as the solar industry rapidly expands, experts say we can expect to see agrivoltaics expanding right alongside it.

Opening up new markets

The nation will need to build out a massive amount of utility-scale solar to meet its decarbonization goals. Given that agricultural land comprises 44% of the U.S.′ total land area, many solar developers are looking to cite new projects on farms.

“For solar developers, I think the attraction of agrivoltaics is largely that it helps with community acceptance and community excitement about solar projects” explains Becca Jones-Albertus, Director of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Solar Energy Technologies Office. “Grazing land in this country is about a third of all of our land use. And if you’re able to make that a dual use with solar energy production, you have now opened up a huge potential market space that wasn’t open before.”

Today, the U.S. has about five gigawatts of agrivoltaic projects, encompassing more than 35,000 acres across over 30 different states. While this only represents about 3% of the country’s installed solar capacity, it’s a growing industry, and farmers are taking note.

“It’s a much better financial contribution than growing crops,” said Koranek about leasing his land to Lightsource. “Crops are very risky. So some years you may make a good return and other years you may not. And so this is a steady income year every year.”

Lightsource operates a combined 615 megawatts of sheep grazing and solar power projects, around 12% of the nation’s entire agrivoltaic portfolio. The company plans to add an additional 1,058 megawatts worth of projects next year.

Shell is also involved in the space through its 44% stake in solar developer Silicon Ranch. The ranch operates 1,300 megawatts of agrivoltaic projects with an additional 900 megawatts planned over the next two years.

While most solar developers opt to lease land, Silicon Ranch buys it outright, often purchasing degraded farmland that’s no longer in production.

“We want to tell these communities that we are committed for the long haul, and we’re going to become members of these communities in meaningful ways,” said Silicon Ranch’s Co-Founder and CEO, Reagan Farr. “So our business model of owning real estate was a function of how we viewed this asset class.”

Like Lightsource, Silicon Ranch pays local ranchers to graze sheep on their solar farms. But Farr says the company has encountered a sheep shortage, leading Silicon Ranch to invest in its own flock, which it plans to grow to over 30,000 by 2030.

While there are other players in the domestic agrivoltaic market such as Enel Green Power and US Solar, Lightsource and Silicon Ranch remain the largest players in the space. American oil majors such as Chevron and Exxon haven’t invested in agrivoltaics.

Solar plus crop production

While it’s relatively well understood how to graze sheep and create pollinator habitats among solar panels, it’s a trickier prospect to grow crops below and between the panels.

Many crops such as tomatoes and broccoli can theoretically grow beneath solar panels, but the design of the solar array usually needs to be altered, often by elevating the panels so that crops can reach their full height. That gets costly, and while the economics can work for small-scale projects in markets with strong solar incentives, scaling up is a challenge.

“I would say given the existing cost of PV technology, given the existing energy markets that we have in the United States, it will be very challenging to see crop production agrivoltaics happen at a scale bigger than five megawatts at a time,” says Macknick.

But even if we won’t see utility-scale crop production and solar energy projects anytime soon, there’s still a lot of energy in this space. The Department of Energy is currently funding six agrivoltaic projects, with the goal of enabling the deployment of over 1 megawatt of projects focused on crop production, and over 10 megawatts of projects focused on grazing and pollinator habitats.

Lightsource BP says it’s interested in getting into crop production, hoping that one of its sites can serve as a test project next year. Farr says Silicon Ranch isn’t pursuing partnerships yet. But whatever route both companies, and their oil industry backers, take, community relationships and mutually beneficial land-use arrangements are going to be paramount.

“We need to bring value to the communities where we site these solar arrays, or we’re going to lose our social license to operate. And that’s going to hurt our ability to meet some of these very aggressive, renewable energy goals that we have as a country,” said Farr.

Source: Cnbc.com

The post Why oil majors Shell and BP are combining solar energy and agricultural production appeared first on Energy News Beat.

 

California’s hydrogen fuel shortage hits three-month mark, with filling stations still offline and no end in sight

Energy News Beat

It has been three months precisely since a “disruption” to the supply of gaseous hydrogen to filling stations in Southern California was first revealed — and the problem continues to persist, with no end in sight.

Data from the Hydrogen Fuel Cell Partnership shows that 23 of the state’s 53 filling stationd were offline at the time this article was published, including 15 out of 29 in the sprawling Greater Los Angeles area.

On 13 August, the state’s largest hydrogen fuel supplier, True Zero, wrote in a letter to customers that ten of its filling stations in the south of the state had seen their fuel supply stopped due to their supplier experiencing “a major service disruption”.

All ten still have no supply of H2, while a further two Iwatani filling stations are also reporting the same problem. Both companies are still saying they do not know when the supply of hydrogen will resume.

The remaining 11 offline hydrogen filling stations either have technical problems or fuel shortages that are not known to be related to the supply disruption in Southern California.

On Friday, hydrogen equipment supplier Plug Power blamed the general lack of available H2 in California as one of the reasons the company underperformed in the third quarter.

Source: Hydrogeninsight.com

The post California’s hydrogen fuel shortage hits three-month mark, with filling stations still offline and no end in sight appeared first on Energy News Beat.

 

Opinion: Net-zero policies colliding with economic reality

Energy News Beat

Across the advanced economies, the politics of net zero are colliding with reality, yet most politicians seem oblivious to the dynamics at play.

The inconvenient truth is that the clean energy transition is not unfolding as foretold. Three decades and trillions of dollars in subsidies later, wind and solar still represent single-digit percentages of global energy demand, which continues to grow. Demand for hydrocarbons, meanwhile, remains at over 80 per cent of the total. Exxon and Chevron recently invested a combined US$110 billion in long-term U.S. oil and gas development, driving home the reality that liquid hydrocarbons will be as indispensable post-2050 as they are today.

Across the Indo-Pacific, home to 75 per cent of the world’s population and 60 per cent of its manufacturing, coal use is growing, not shrinking. In the rich West, supposedly indispensable additions to transmission infrastructure and other key components of large-scale electrification remain political pipedreams — as illustrated by the International Energy Agency’s improbable call for 80 million kilometres of new/upgraded wiring globally by 2040, enough to wrap around the globe 2,000 times and requiring US$600 billion in annual investments by 2030. Back here on Earth, the reality is that across Europe all-important grid connections are routinely caught up in years-long waitlists, while in North America permitting legislation makes building interstate/interprovincial power-sharing infrastructure virtually impossible.

Our governments holding forth sanctimoniously about imagined climate-driven severe weather events while imposing large-scale use of wind and solar is insanity with serious consequences — among them, rolling-blackouts across the U.S. and Europe, with mounting loss of life. British Columbia’s NDP government’s anticipated five-year 400 MW/year generation program, the equivalent of two large utility plants, is to be produced solely by intermittent renewables, which is physically impossible.

As early as 2018, key industry executives warned that the renewables sector risked an Enron-style collapse because of its insatiable subsidy-dependence. That unwinding is now happening across the wind, solar and EV industries, and it’s driven by dynamics unlikely to be reversed.

As demand falters, skyrocketing costs are outstripping even massive subsidies. When investors see this, the market cap of key companies craters. SolarEdge Technologies, a bellwether, is down 70 per cent. Investco’s renewables fund is off 40 per cent, while Canadian Solar’s proposed major investment in the U.S. is clearly in jeopardy.

Unmanageable costs and permitting quagmires have triggered the cancellation of wind-power projects on both sides of the Atlantic, causing investors and banks to retreat. Faced with crippling technical problems, growing warranty exposure and companies like Shell walking away from multi-billion-dollar projects, industry leaders Orsted, Vestas and Siemens Gamesa are in structural financial crisis, their shares down by 30 to 60 per cent. Siemens Energy’s recent request for a $16-billion bailout prompted BP’s head of renewable energy to say the industry was “broken.”

EVs have always been net zero’s sentinel technology. Politically styled as virtuous, revolutionizing trendsetters, they are in fact, and ironically, the very embodiment of the clean energy narrative’s magical thinking, wrapping potent negative externalities in a sleek shell. But politicians neglected to check with mainstream buyers, who in growing numbers are deciding these expensive marvels are not for them, while the affluent early adopters who have carried the industry near saturation. A surprising number of original buyers are signalling their next vehicle will be gas-powered. Markets for used EVs are in freefall, confirming the growing disenchantment.

With influential analysts belatedly realizing Tesla is an overvalued car company, not a technology miracle, its stock has dropped 25 per cent. Other EV start-ups face impossible refinancing odds. VW is closing down an entire production line. Ford is pulling back $12 billion in EV investments and Honda and GM are cancelling a $5-billion EV co-development program. These are all unmistakable market signals.

Detroit has effectively decided that, even with all the subsidies the Biden administration is providing, it can’t afford to both build EVs and pay its new settlement with the UAW. Tesla shelving its Mexican expansion will in turn likely prompt ever-cautious Toyota to reconsider a proposed $8-billion U.S. investment.

Here at home these developments lay bare the Trudeau government’s decision to lavish money on battery factories in vote-rich Ontario and Quebec for the stunning incompetence and breathtaking policy hubris it is.

Americans might be stuck with a Biden-Trump rematch
Will Ottawa’s fiscal update trim spending and debt?
E-procurement saves money, cuts corruption

What we are witnessing are not bumps in the road to an inevitable clean energy transition but evidence of socio-economic realities unravelling the politics of net zero — including the fiction that we must urgently and radically re-engineer our societies to stop a supposed climate catastrophe that in fact isn’t.

Henry Geraedts worked in venture capital internationally. His PhD is in international political economy, with an interest in strategic aspects of energy and technology.

Source: Finance.yahoo.com

Real Estate Investor Pulse

1031 Exchange E-Book

ENB Top News 
ENB
Energy Dashboard
ENB Podcast
ENB Substack

The post Opinion: Net-zero policies colliding with economic reality appeared first on Energy News Beat.

 

ExxonMobil Chairman and CEO, Darren Woods, talks about reframing the climate challenge during the APEC CEO Summit

Energy News Beat

Good morning, and thank you for the opportunity to speak today.

Like all of us, I wear many hats.

In my professional life, I’m the CEO of ExxonMobil, one of the largest investor-owned companies in the world.

By training, I’m an engineer, which in many ways is how I still see myself – as someone who solves problems.

And in my personal life, I’m a father and grandfather – who cares about his family, their quality of life, and their futures.

Which means, I care very much about our environment and the health of our planet.

The Challenges We Face

My views on the climate challenge are informed by all of these perspectives, as is my commitment to finding solutions.

I’m fully aware that there are many who question ExxonMobil’s commitment because of what was said over 30 years ago or what they think Exxon knew back then.

Frankly, I’m more interested in what ExxonMobil knows today.

So, allow me to share this with you – here’s what ExxonMobil knows:

Climate change is real,
Human activity plays a major role,
And, it is one of the major problems facing the world today – the need to address the very real threat of climate change.

But it’s not the only one.

Here’s another global problem, equally important – the need to continue producing affordable energy to maintain and raise living standards around the world.

Three billion people fall short of modern living standards, and far too many remain trapped in extreme poverty with no access to electricity or clean cooking fuels.

The global North-South divide will only be bridged when we commit to solving the world’s energy and emissions challenges simultaneously.

Oil and gas are at the center of both. Combusting them is a leading source of man-made greenhouse gas emissions. That’s the societal cost, and it’s real.

At the same time, the societal benefits of oil and gas are unmatched in human history. They’ve done more to grow economies, eradicate poverty and improve quality of life than anything else.

The Role of Energy Companies in the Energy Transition

If some of you are surprised by the clarity of ExxonMobil’s position on the climate challenge, even more noteworthy is the scale of our effort to address it.

If you were to list the biggest challenges facing humankind, addressing energy poverty and climate change are at the top.

And if you list the companies with a realistic chance to help improve access to energy and “bend the curve” on emissions, ExxonMobil would also be at the top.

To understand why, it’s important to grasp where the bulk of the world’s energy-related emissions come from. It’s not from the passenger vehicle sector that gets so much of the attention – cars and light trucks only account for 10% of energy-related CO2 emissions.

More than 80% come from commercial transportation, heavy industry, and power generation.

Wind and solar have great utility as a source of low-carbon electricity, but they just can’t get the job done in these hard-to-decarbonize sectors.

We need to open the aperture to a much broader set of solutions.

While renewable energy is essential to help the world achieve net zero, it is not sufficient – wind and solar alone can’t solve emissions in the industrial sectors that are at the heart of a modern society.

The technologies ExxonMobil is pursuing can.

Consider carbon capture and storage, where we capture emissions at the source, transport them by pipeline and permanently store them deep underground.

Just in the last year:

We’ve signed carbon capture and storage agreements with a steel company, a fertilizer company, and an industrial-gas company.These three projects alone, will reduce CO2 emissions by the same amount as replacing 2 million cars with EVs. This is roughly the total number of electric vehicles on U.S. roads today.
We’ve also secured exclusive rights to CO2 storage in Indonesia and Malaysia.With the right policy, we can create regional solutions for many of the industrial economies in Asia that don’t have large geologic formations suitable for storage.
We’ve announced the world’s largest, low-carbon hydrogen plant, capable of producing 1 billion cubic feet per day.This single plant could produce nearly 10% of the Biden administration’s 2030 low-carbon hydrogen goal.
We’re pursuing a dozen low-emission biofuels projects to meet what could be a 400% increase in demand by 2050.
And, as we announced on Monday, we’re making a major investment in lithium production, which is essential to the world’s effort to electrify as much of the economy as possible.

All of this – and more – is supported by our investment of approximately 17 billion dollars over six years …and our almost $5 billion dollar acquisition of a company with the largest pipeline system in the U.S. for transporting and storing CO2.

When it comes to developing additional solutions, beyond wind, solar and EVs, nobody is investing more.

On an annualized basis, our spend is more than one third of the budget of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Think about that: One company, investing a third as much as the U.S. agency responsible for environmental protection.

World-scale problems like climate change, need world-scale companies to help solve them – like ExxonMobil.

Time to Get Serious

Despite progress toward net zero, serious obstacles remain. Many of the ideas being put forward to accelerate the energy transition are not based in economic, technological, or political reality.

To get serious about net zero, the world needs to get real.

We cannot replace overnight an energy system that took 150 years to build. The size and complexity are simply too vast.

Those who would tear down the existing energy system have the wrong problem statement. The problem is not oil and gas. It’s emissions.

Never before have we stopped using an energy source because of the byproduct it produces.

We successfully dealt with smog and acid rain by addressing harmful emissions, not by banning cars or shutting down power plants.

The solutions to climate change have been too focused on reducing supply.

That’s a recipe, for human hardship and a poorer world.

Leaving oil in the ground does nothing to stop the demand for it. It simply raises the price and makes it harder to alleviate poverty around the world.

The global North grew vastly wealthier because of economic growth powered by oil and gas.

The story is very different in the global South.

In non-OECD countries, income per person is still only 11,000 dollars a year.

No country has ever joined the developed world without access to oil and gas. The countries of the global South have every right to lift their people out of energy poverty and into the global middle class.

What Serious Looks Like

At the moment, net zero by 2050 remains an aspiration.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the International Energy Agency have both made clear that the world is not on the path to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement.

Pledges are not enough. The world needs a plan.

To get serious, three things are needed: supportive public policy, significant technology advancements, and a smooth transition from government subsidies to market-based mechanisms.

The governments of Asia-Pacific, and elsewhere, need to embrace constructive policy to encourage the shift to a lower-emissions future.

As a business leader who spends his time solving challenging large-scale problems, I’d like to suggest, some guiding principles:

Don’t pick winners and losers.
Don’t focus on an answer that fails to solve all aspects of the problem.
For really complex issues like climate change… keep all viable solutions in play – even if they don’t align with your beliefs or ideology.

And, most importantly, leverage the power of competitive markets.

Market incentives for carbon reduction like a price on carbon, or policy incentives such as the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act, will drive innovation and engage all relevant players – leading to better solutions, faster.

We should allow technologies and companies to compete – and let the best solutions win.

For example, the IRA made the playing field for carbon capture more level by raising the incentive for CO2 removal to 85 dollars a ton. I say “more level” because the subsidy for electric vehicles is still 450 dollars a ton – or five times as high.

Technology-agnostic subsidies can kick-start a range of low-emission solutions, but they must have an expiration date.

No government can afford to subsidize the energy transition forever.

Beyond incentives, we need a concentrated effort on advancing technology.

Collaboration is key. In simple terms, governments fund research, universities and labs conduct it, and companies develop and deploy it.

And we need an all-of-the-above approach. It’s far too early in the process to rule out any technology.

The final element critical to long-term success is market-based mechanisms.

When carbon reduction is economic, it will be everywhere.

Right now, that’s not the case. Low-carbon energy from solar to biofuels remains dependent on government support. Ultimately, the world must shift to market-based incentives to drive emissions lower.

As a practical matter, the world will need government policy to make this happen.

Let me close with this.

Oil and gas companies reliably provide affordable products essential to modern life.

Making them into villains is easy. But it does nothing – absolutely nothing – to accomplish the goal of reducing emissions.

In fact, it puts the reliable supply of energy at risk…destabilizing global economies, degrading people’s standards of living, and, as we saw in Europe, actually raising emissions.

The better approach – the constructive approach – is to harness the industry’s capabilities for change.

Put us to work. We’ve got the tools – the skills, the size, and the intellectual and financial resources – to bend the curve on emissions.

That’s what ExxonMobil Knows.

Thank you very much.

Source: Corporate.exxonmobil.com

Real Estate Investor Pulse

1031 Exchange E-Book

ENB Top News 
ENB
Energy Dashboard
ENB Podcast
ENB Substack

The post ExxonMobil Chairman and CEO, Darren Woods, talks about reframing the climate challenge during the APEC CEO Summit appeared first on Energy News Beat.

 

#154 Kevin Hokett, President, American Safety Services – Live in the Permian Oil Show – Saving lives everyday.

Energy News Beat

Podcasts are always fun, and today is no exception. I had the opportunity to visit with Kevin Hokett, President, and Noah Dean, Business Development of American Safety Services. We were live at the Permian International Oil Show, and It was a blast.

Kevin and Noah’s experience in the oil and gas market is huge. We covered everything from team roping, authoring books, and how to keep the low-cost energy flowing. Also a huge shout out to Kieth Stelter, Chief Strategy Officer and podcast host for pulling this together!

Also, thank Brian Stubbs at Air Compressor Solutions and Rey Trevino with Pecos Operating! Brian and Rey were instrumental in getting the live events rolling.

Follow and connect with Kevin here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevin-hokett-840b867b/

Follow and connect with Noah here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/noah-dean-701740231/

Follow and connect with Keith here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/keith-stelter-575b9312/

Follow and connect with Brian here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/brianstubbs/

Follow and connect with Rey here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/reytrevinoiii/

Check out American Safety Services HERE: https://www.americansafety.net/

Check out Air Compressor Solutions HERE: https://acsir.com

Check out Pecos Operating HERE: https://pecosoperating.com/

Real Estate Investor Pulse

1031 Exchange E-Book

ENB Top News 

ENB

Energy Dashboard

ENB Podcast

ENB Substack

The post #154 Kevin Hokett, President, American Safety Services – Live in the Permian Oil Show – Saving lives everyday. appeared first on Energy News Beat.

 

Billionaire Funds the Guardian to Tune of $116 Per Reader of Print Edition

Energy News Beat

In 2021 the Guardian ran a series of adverts claiming the newspaper was “not funded by billionaires”, and “our readers’ backing gives us the independence to hold the powerful to account”. Not perhaps all the powerful. The Guardian is backed by a number of billionaire philanthropic foundations, including the European Climate Fund and the Rockefeller Family Fund. According to the investigative journalist Ben Pile, an additional $12 million grant from the Gates Foundation is equivalent alone to $116 for every reader of the print version.

This information is contained in a sensational and wide-ranging report from Pile that lifts the lid on the extraordinary influence a few wealthy individuals have recently gained in directing public policy across many political issues, including medicine, climate and Net Zero. Funding mainstream media plays a large part in driving public policy, and the amounts of money involved are staggering. So are the clouds of smoke produced to hide the scale of the subsidy. Pile notes that although the Guardian has run many articles denouncing the lack of transparency around the funding of Right-of-centre civil society organisations and the influence of ‘dark money’, neither the newspaper nor many of its backers detail their own funding relationships.

The Guardian is not the only mainstream media outlet in the U.K. to benefit from cash injections from Bill Gates. The BBC collects a handsome $58 million, while sizeable gifts have been pocketed by the Daily Telegraph and the Financial Times.

Climate-related grants between 2013-2021 by principal and strategic foundations are estimated to total $2.7 billion. This compares with an average 2018-2022 annual income for the Global Warming Policy Foundation, a critical climate and Net Zero think tank demonised by green activists, of $470,238. All this green largesse buys a lot of the useful smoke. The European Climate Fund, for instance, funds InfluenceMap which suggested in 2018 that the five largest oil companies spent $200 million a year on “narrative capture and lobbying on climate”. Earlier investigative work by Pile revealed that most of the claimed expenditure was based on speculation and estimation. Meanwhile, InfluenceMap’s own 11 funders were shown to have spent $1.2 billion on funding climate change campaigning and lobbying.

The latest Pile report is published by Together and Climate Debate U.K. and is titled ‘“Clean” Air, Dirty Money, Filthy Politics‘. It focuses on the “big bucks” behind the U.K. anti-car policies and air pollution panics. Its range is wide and the Daily Sceptic will report on some of the issues it raises in subsequent articles. But the main gist of its sensational findings is that a few ‘philanthropists’ now have “extraordinary influence” in global agencies such as the United Nations and the World Health Organisation, and their interest aligns academic research and non-governmental organisations of all kinds. In the process, they exclude the wider society and promote and often implement policies that have no grassroots support.

In London, Mayor Sadiq Khan chairs the C40 group of world mayors. Backed by billionaires such as Michael Bloomberg and Extinction Rebellion funder Sir Christopher Hohn, the group promotes a variety of lifestyle changes surrounding restriction of diet, travel and many other personal freedoms. It claims to represent “over 82 million people from diverse global contexts and around one fifth of the global economy”. Pile observes that it seems extremely unlikely that eight million Londoners have even heard of C40, let alone agree to its radical visions for the reorganisation of their lives.

Air pollution policies such as London’s Ultra Low Emissions Zone are said to be “proxy battles” of the climate war. Organisations involved in air pollution policies are wholly funded by climate change interests. “There are no grassroots air pollution campaigns of consequence,” states Pile. The public has been excluded from politics, he continues. Experts that depart from the policy agenda are routinely excluded from the public debate by research agendas, editorial policy and cancel culture. This deprives the public of debate about costs and trade-offs of far reaching policies. As an example it can be noted that the move to full Net Zero by 2050 was nodded through the British Parliament during the death throes of a May Government desperately seeking what was considered at the time as a virtuous legacy.

It is all possible because well-funded green organisations have worked to form a cross-party consensus. At the local level, continues Pile, air pollution policies have been imposed on populations without due democratic process. This of course has ended in London with a Labour Mayor punching down hard on car ownership among the less affluent members of society. Independent local organisations are “overwhelmed” by extremely well-funded and well-connected green organisations’ campaigns, he notes.

Source: Dailysceptic.org

Real Estate Investor Pulse

1031 Exchange E-Book

ENB Top News 
ENB
Energy Dashboard
ENB Podcast
ENB Substack

The post Billionaire Funds the Guardian to Tune of $116 Per Reader of Print Edition appeared first on Energy News Beat.

 

Experts raise alarm after Biden strikes agreement with China to shut down fossil fuels

Energy News Beat

U.S. energy experts are warning of the economic and national security implications of President Biden’s pact with China this week to move towards shutting down fossil fuel production in favor of green energy.

The State Department announced this week it had struck a deal with its Chinese counterparts pledging to “accelerate the substitution for coal, oil and gas generation” with green energy sources like wind and solar power. The nations, which account for nearly half of global greenhouse gas emissions, also agreed to “deepen policy exchanges” on reducing carbon emissions in various sectors, like power, industry, buildings and transportation, across their economies.

But the agreement — in which the nations further pledged to “sufficiently accelerate renewable energy deployment in their respective economies through 2030” — was criticized over its potential impact on U.S. consumers. Experts also noted that China has rarely followed through on international accords and stands to financially benefit from such an agreement since it controls much of the world’s green energy supply chain.

“The agreement speaks heavily about advancing — doubling down and tripling down on renewables, wind and solar. The majority of them are made in China,” Daniel Turner, the founder and executive director of Power The Future, told Fox News Digital in an interview.

“So, you’re basically writing an agreement that guarantees China a customer and guarantees their manufacturing sector decades of purchasing. Of course China would love this agreement. And their obligations — they’ll just ignore that. They’ve ignored every other obligation,” Turner added. “It is basically guaranteeing China decades of wealth, guaranteeing America is going to buy their products.”

In addition, the U.S. and China pledged under the agreement Tuesday to each advance five large-scale carbon capture, utilization and storage projects by the end of the decade. Carbon capture is a nascent and expensive technology that is designed to catch a power plant’s emissions before they could enter the atmosphere, but it hasn’t been deployed at any power plant nationwide.

The agreement was finalized during Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry’s meeting with Chinese Special Envoy for Climate Change Xie Zhenhua in Sunnylands, California, last week. And it came shortly before Biden met with Chinese President Xi Jinping in San Francisco.

“The cooperative initiatives outlined by State Department will create make-work for bureaucrats, subsidies for rent-seekers, photo ops for local politicians, and new opportunities for Chinese agents of influence and industrial spies,” Competitive Enterprise Institute senior fellow Marlo Lewis told Fox News Digital.

“The effect on climate change, if any, will be negative, as the ‘cooperation’ will nudge the United States closer to Beijing-style central planning, production quotas, and groupthink,” he continued.

Overall, while the U.S. is the largest global producer of oil and gas which still drives every major industry from transportation and power to manufacturing and construction, Chinese companies have established a major foothold in green energy markets.

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), for example, China produces about 75% of all lithium-ion batteries, a key component of electric vehicles (EV), worldwide. The nation also boasts 70% of production capacity for cathodes and 85% for anodes, two key parts of such batteries.

In addition, more than 50% of lithium, cobalt and graphite processing and refining capacity is located in China, the IEA data showed. Those three critical minerals, in addition to copper and nickel, are vital for EV batteries and other green energy technologies. Chinese investment firms have also been aggressive in purchasing stakes in African mines in recent years to ensure a firm control over mineral production.

China also continues to dominate the global solar supply chain even as Western nations attempt to increase domestic manufacturing capabilities. According to a July 2022 IEA report, China has a greater than 80% share in all the manufacturing stages of solar panel manufacturing. China further produces a staggering 95% of all global polysilicon, ingot and wafer supplies necessary for solar products.

“After ESG extremists like Larry Fink met with Chinese Dictator Xi Jinping this week, the Biden Administration reaffirmed its commitment to China to push climate policies that will effectively destroy the U.S. energy industry in favor of green energy initiatives that rely on China’s production of solar panels and batteries,” Will Hild, the executive director of Consumers’ Research, an advocacy group, told Fox News Digital.

“Consumers are fed up with EV mandates, gas appliance bans, and other climate initiatives the Biden Administration continues to peddle,” he said. “Clearly climate alarmism remains a higher priority to President Biden than ensuring American consumers have access to affordable energy and consumer goods. Consumers’ Research will continue to call out these ideologically-driven policies that hurt American consumers while helping the Chinese Communist Party.”

While China has established a stranglehold of green energy supply chains, it has also led a massive expansion of coal power to sustain its massive economy. In 2022, the nation permitted a whopping 106 gigawatts of new coal power capacity, roughly quadrupling the amount permitted in 2021, an analysis published by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air and Global Energy Monitor showed.

According to the American Geosciences Institute, burning coal produces more carbon emissions compared to burning any other fossil fuel. Coal power can have as much as twice the carbon footprint as natural gas.

China already accounts for about 27% of total global greenhouse gas emissions, according to Rhodium Group. The nation’s emissions output is equivalent to triple the total of the U.S., which is the world’s second-largest emitter.

“The Sunnylands agreement is nothing more than political sop from Communist China to try to help Biden and Kerry politically, and to keep the America-hurting climate hoax going,” Steve Milloy, a senior legal fellow at the Energy & Environment Legal Institute, told Fox News Digital. “The agreement does not bind China to cut emissions or to do anything else of importance.”

“But keeping the climate hoax alive is very important to China for three reasons: 1) climate spending and climate regulations hurt the U.S. economy and help the Chinese economy; 2) mandates for green technology deepen U.S. dependence on China for that technology; and 3) both of the aforementioned compromise US national security and further China’s goal of becoming the lone global superpower by 2049,” Milloy continued.

And Jason Isaac, the CEO and founder of The American Energy Institute, told Fox News Digital that the agreement was “laughable” since it states China remains committed to the 2015 Paris Accords.

“Not a single country complies with the Paris Agreement, not even France. The Paris Agreement is based on the false premise that CO2, a trace gas that makes up 0.04% of the atmosphere, is causing catastrophic warming,” Isaac said. “It’s not, and China knows it. That’s why the global consumption of coal in 2022 increased by 9%, and China built two coal plants per week to generate affordable, reliable electricity.”

“Xi knows that the grid in America is getting crushed under the weight of a so-called energy transition. Over 80% of our reliable thermal generation from natural gas and coal will age-out in the next two decades,” he added. “Instead of aging out, we need to build new generation more than ever.”

“Yet, the current administration is making new, reliable electric generation construction nearly impossible. Biden’s bailout of China has turned our foreign policy to ‘China first, America last.’”

The post Experts raise alarm after Biden strikes agreement with China to shut down fossil fuels appeared first on Energy News Beat.

 

Why is Ukraine now claiming its disastrous counteroffensive was only a smokescreen?

Energy News Beat

16 Nov, 2023 20:24

HomeRussia & FSU

Kiev’s propagandists are trying to deny the reality that Russia is gaining the edge on the battlefield

A few days ago, the Kiev TV channel 1 + 1 reported that the Ukrainian army did not conduct a counteroffensive in the summer of 2023, and all the information about it was merely a brilliant psychological operation targeted against the enemy.

The story made use of popular stereotypes to show Ukrainians in the most favorable light – as skillful and smart people, capable of finding an original solution to a difficult task. The video was  accompanied by memes popular in the late 2000s, which millennials would easily relate to.

The story was accompanied by the following comments: “The war is being waged not only on the ground and in the air, but also in the minds [of people]. In the future, Ukrainian psyops will be analyzed in textbooks. One of the most successful such operations is the ‘counteroffensive’. For several months, we deceived the enemy, claiming that we were conducting a large-scale offensive operation. Our cyber troops spread this information on the enemy’s social networks and [implanted it] in their minds. For several months, Russians have been subjected to a powerful psychological attack while our troops are getting stronger [and preparing] for a real counteroffensive.”

Not only does the Ukrainian media deny reality, but it also continues to deceive people, promising a new counteroffensive once the troops are ready.

Why is the Ukrainian media doing this? Why do Ukrainians need such stories? How and why did the ‘information confrontation’ become a public affair? And is it true that the Ukrainian counteroffensive didn’t take place?

Failed blitzkrieg

The purpose of the video is simple – it intends to turn the narrative around, implying that the defeat of the Ukrainian Armed Forces (AFU) wasn’t actually a defeat, but a victory. The idea is that the Ukrainians deceived the Russians, and while Moscow deployed its reserves – including elite airborne divisions – near Rabotino, the AFU continued preparations for a real offensive. This would give people hope that Kiev’s newly formed units, armed with Western equipment, have not been defeated, but continue training. Finally, Ukrainians need to believe that they have outsmarted the Russians, who were easily deceived – in other words, they need to believe in their intellectual superiority.

Why does Ukraine need this narrative? Essentially, the lies will distract a certain number of people from the current state of affairs, which AFU Commander-in-Chief Valery Zaluzhny and former presidential aide Alexey Arestovich have been talking about for quite some time and described as a protracted war of attrition.

Based on the ideas expressed by some members of the Ukrainian establishment, we see that the failed counteroffensive put an end to Ukraine’s hopes for an early end to the war – which could have been ensured by defeating the Russian army near Melitopol, cutting off the land corridor to Crimea and reaching the Crimean isthmus. According to Arestovich, this is what Ukraine originally counted on.

Ukrainians expected such a blitzkrieg when Zelensky and other officials initially announced the counteroffensive. This could have prevented the war from turning into a war of attrition, which, according to Zaluzhny, is strategically advantageous to Russia.

The destruction of Leopard and Bradley tanks near Rabotino was important not just from a military point of view, but also psychologically. The AFU’s inability to break the so-called Surovikin Line of defense forced ordinary Ukrainians to abandon hopes of a return to peaceful life.

In the fall of 2023, when the conquered territories turned into a muddy mess, many Ukrainians began wondering ‘what’s next?’. People asked themselves whether they were ready to continue living in conditions of constant, even if less intense, war.

The idea of a blitzkrieg fell through after the AFU’s failed attempt.

A tale of the creative class for the creative class

This tempted Ukraine to create an imaginary reality, one where there was no counteroffensive and all the killed Ukrainians and destroyed military equipment were simply part of a cunning plan. This way, Kiev could preserve its own picture of the world – a world without existential fears, a permanent humanitarian crisis, and continuous mobilization. And, more importantly, the country wouldn’t need to reassess its forces and methods of action.

Moreover, the psyop concept has become profitable for a certain segment of Ukrainian society – the so-called information class, which before the war used to earn money in the field of politics, the nonprofit sector, marketing, and PR.

These people want to control Ukrainian society. From ordinary civilians, they have turned into authoritative soldiers of the information front.

They have always catered to the Ukrainian elites, selling them narratives and means of public communication. Now, when Ukraine is at war and refuses to hold democratic elections, the only way they can maintain their influence is to serve the needs of the war – without even having the necessary education and knowledge for it.

For this reason, they attempted to treat the failed summer counteroffensive as if it were another normal project, while completely ignoring the thousands of lives lost during the operation.

In reality, this garbage thrown into the Ukrainian media space exists only in order to be ridiculed.

How it really was and will be

Everyone found out about the real counteroffensive in the Melitopol direction when Kiev lost dozens of units of Western equipment in early June. The Russian army made sure to record plenty of video footage confirming this.

Ukrainian society was frustrated by these videos and the lack of statements from officials. A week later, however, the authorities and media were forced to admit what had happened.

Then, as the Ukrainian army advanced towards Rabotino, the Vremevsky ledge, and in the Artyomovsk direction, it issued many hopeful statements and counted every square kilometer of Russian territory that it managed to occupy.

The problem, however, was that this territory was won at a huge cost – the ‘exchange rate’ was very unfavorable for Ukraine, forcing the AFU to throw one brigade after another into battle. A classic example was the entry into battle of the 82nd Brigade, which allowed Ukraine to capture Rabotino. At that point, however, its operational reserves were depleted.

At the time, however, pro-Ukrainian experts discussed the ratio of equipment losses (supposedly in the AFU’s favor), the fighting which allegedly depleted the enemy’s resources (when Russia’s Seventh Air Assault Division was transferred from Kherson to the Zaporozhye Region, Ukrainians perceived this as a herald of victory), and counted the number of kilometers to the end of the minefields, after which AFU units trained according to NATO standards would surely defeat Russia’s Soviet-legacy forces.

By the end of the summer, however, the AFU still could not break through the Russian defense. It got stuck near the Vremevsky ledge, and then transferred marine brigades to carry out amphibious operations across the Dnieper River in another operational direction.

Gradually, the Russian Armed Forces intensified their offensive in the Kupyansk, Liman, and Artyomovsk directions. In October, Russia’s large-scale assault on Avdeevka forced the Ukrainians to deploy the 47th Mechanized Brigade – the same unit that launched the offensive on Rabotino in June.

The transition to positional warfare – which Russian experts noted back in the winter of 2022-23 – became obvious to the Ukrainians only six months later. As a result, they began arguing with their Western backers over the supposedly insufficient and untimely military assistance. In parallel, the Ukrainians promised that if they received aviation, their next counteroffensive would certainly be more effective. Finally, Zaluzhny wrote an article in which he admitted that unless the army manages to break through enemy lines soon and things go back to maneuver warfare, Ukraine will suffer a strategic defeat.

Real Estate Investor Pulse

1031 Exchange E-Book

ENB Top News 
ENB
Energy Dashboard
ENB Podcast
ENB Substack

The post Why is Ukraine now claiming its disastrous counteroffensive was only a smokescreen? appeared first on Energy News Beat.