The World’s Population Explosion Demands New Energy and Electricity Channels

Co-authored by Ronald Stein and Nancy Pearlman

December 26, 2025

Utilizing but not replenishing the natural resources of Planet Earth has limitations.

The United Nations graph is an image worth 1,000 words as virtually no further explanation is needed as the world’s population explosion occurred after we discovered ways to process that black tar, i.e., crude oil, through refineries into various oil derivatives that are the basis of more than 6,000 products, and transportation fuels, to support the publics’ demands for those products, which is the one of the main reason we continue to explore for that black tar.

One of the main causes of the world population growing from 1 to 8 billion was the products made from oil that supported the population growth, the same products that continue to be demanded by today’s humanity, that only come from processed crude oil. A voluntary global reduction in population growth would put less pressure on the extraction of our earth’s resources

Just a few hundred years ago, before oil, the world was less spoiled and dominated by mother nature and the wild animal kingdom. There were fewer humans competing with the animals due to humanity’s limited ability to survive what mother nature provided. Before oil, life was hard and dirty, with many weather and disease-related deaths.

After oil, the products made from oil allowed us to create various modes of transportation, a medical industry, and electronics and communications systems. Those products from oil reduced infant mortality, extended longevity from 40+ to more than 80+, and gave the public the ability to move anywhere in the world via planes, trains, ships, and vehicles, and virtually eliminated deaths from many diseases and from all forms of weather. All that apparent “progress” is being “blamed” on the introduction of oil into society.

We’ve been trying to “clone” crude oil for two hundred years to maintain the supply chain of products that supported the population growth from 1 to 8 billion in those 200 years.

The main reason we continue to use that useless black tar, i.e., crude oil, is to break it down via refineries, into oil derivatives and transportation fuels.

We don’t NEED oil; we need the PRODUCTS and TRANSPORTATION FUELS that they provide. We should also develop renewables while we explore new technologies and products not based on oil. While alternative plant-based products are being developed, we still need to invest more in these non-fossil fuel initiatives.

The best that the GREEN movement has come up with for energy is wind and solar, but those renewables only generate electricity but CANNOT make any of the PRODUCTS and TRANSPORTATION FUELS. Most insulting is that wind and solar are made with those products that come from processed crude oil!

It seems that most PEOPLE on this planet are 100% in favor of ridding the use of that natural resource of crude oil from this 4-billion-year-old planet, but we have yet to identify its replacement that can support the supply chain demands of our materialistic society and economy. Of course, reducing our consumption of resources is just one small step but more is needed.

Since we’ve been unable to replace oil, we need to focus on improving our conservation and efficiency and recycling to make that natural resource last as long as possible.

Electricity came AFTER oil, as ALL electrical generation methods from hydro, coal, natural gas, nuclear, wind, and solar are ALL built with the products, components, and equipment that are made from oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil.

Without Crude Oil there can be no Electricity! But we can and should be developing renewables that do not depend on crude oil.

In addition, electricity can charge an iPhone, but neither wind turbines nor solar panels can MAKE an iPhone, thus everything that needs electricity consists of products that are also made from oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil.

Without Crude Oil there will be no products like iPhones, X-ray machines, etc., that NEEDS electricity!

We can develop a “few” products from bamboo or hemp, etc., but all the experts in the world have been unable to match the versatility and diverse products that have resulted in more than 6,000 products that did not exist a few hundred years ago. So, until alternatives to these oil-based products are found, oil should be used as little as possible for transportation and other uses where there are alternatives. And of course we go back to the root cause of environmental destruction, overpopulation. Changes must be made to reduce the number of people on the planet to a viable carrying capacity.

The world extracts from Mother Earth over 100 million barrels of oil per day, while the United States consumes around 20 million barrels daily. That oil is not being replenished, and those poorer developing countries want to be “like us”, thus worldwide extraction rates may increase to meet the demands of humanity for all 8 billion now on this planet. The United States should be taking a leading role is reducing demand for oil and take a leading role in solving our climate crisis.

At that horrific rate of extracting that “one” natural resource, the question is “what are the oil reserves”? Technology keeps changing, but current estimates are 100 to 200 years of oil reserves left on this planet. Let us use it wisely so it will last!

Even if the estimated reserves are way off, and we have 500 or 1,000 years left, this 4-billion-year-old planet will still be part of the Solar System with or without us.

We don’t mean to be pessimistic, but reality is right in our face.

Oil-based products, mainly plastic, are causing ecological havoc. Microplastics are in the land, oceans, and our bodies and are unhealthy for humans and wildlife. Recycling and reuse are crucial.

Hopefully, we, in the wealthier and healthier countries, can co-exist with the poorer and less healthy countries that are enslaving labor in mines and factories to provide the exotic minerals and metals required for the green energy technologies for the construction of EV batteries, solar panels, and wind turbines, and with the Saudis, Russians, and Chinese without chaos for the oil demands of America.

Humanity exists in all weather extremes of the world, from the hot and dry Sahara Desert to the frigid northern hemispheres. The animal kingdom has adjusted to climate change over billions of years but can’t evolve fast enough for the human impacts we have caused. And now humanity, without a replacement for raw crude oil, may need to use the tools provided by oil products and fuels to master the continuous climate change adjustment challenges.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

[BIO: Nancy Pearlman is an award-winning environmentalist and anthropologist. She has produced 600 programs for ECONEWS TV and has created over 2700 Environmental Directions radio shows. She was honored as a United Nations Environment Programme Global Five Hundred Laureate. Nancy is Director of the nonprofit organization Educational Communications. To reach Nancy Pearlman and to find out about her environmental activities, go to http://www.ecoprojects.org.]

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Are the zero-emissions ideologues Energy Blind?

Co-authored by Ronald Stein and Tom Kirkman

December 19, 2025

To “make” renewables work, requires all the parts and components made from fossil fuels.

Shockingly, zero-emissions ideologists have no comprehension that renewables, like wind and solar, only exist to generate occasional electricity. Since these so-called renewables, CANNOT manufacture any of the more than 6,000 products AND the various transportation fuels made from hydrocarbons for vehicles, planes and ships, that are demanded by the infrastructures of today, the same infrastructures that did not exist 200 years ago.

We often hear that solar and wind ELECTRICITY is “clean” and basically “free” and it does not have thermal losses like a nuclear or gas-fired power plant. But to make this wind and solar energy usable and reliable in the real world, we have to build enormous support systems, mine rare minerals, manufacture components, build storage, upgrade the grid, maintain everything, and then, eventually, dispose of it. It’s not just about a solar panel and a little breeze blowing over a turbine blade.

Those green ideologies are 100% political in the few wealthy countries that can afford to subsidize their delusions with taxpayer funded subsidies! Examples of the “green” delusion:

• The “green” mandates for transitioning from ICE vehicles to EVs, those so-called “zero emissions” vehicles would only eliminate gasoline used in ICE vehicles, which is only 1 of the more than 6,000 products made from hydrocarbons. The EV, like the ICE vehicle, continues to be 100% made from those oil products, inclusive of tires, computers, wiring and insulation, and all the electronics of true climate progress begin not with mandates, but with energy literacy — understanding what energy can and cannot do, and respecting the balance between ambition and reality.

• None of the green illusionists, inclusive of one of its political leaders such as California Governor Gavin Newsom, can explain how wind turbines and solar panels can make any of the other 5,999 products made from oil that we see in operating hospitals, airports, offices, shopping centers, data centers, etc. or how those renewables will support the merchant ships, cruise ships, commercial aircraft, and military aircraft on this planet that did not exist 200 years ago?

The massive amounts of mining and manufacturing needed to make the physical components for industrial scale Wind Turbine, and Solar Panel installations, and EV batteries are very bad for humanity and the environment.

• Inside the Congo cobalt mines that exploit children. The SKY NEWS 6-minute video is confirmation of the Pulitzer Prize nominated book “Clean Energy Exploitations” that describes the humanity atrocities among folks with yellow, brown, and black skin, and the environmental degradation occurring in developing countries so that the wealthy countries can go green.

Subsidies to purchase EVs are financial incentives to encourage further exploitations of yellow, brown, and black skin residents in developing countries. The environmental impacts of EV mandates; impacts that are deliberately being ignored by EV evangelists.

Consequently, there may be growing ethical and moral concerns from buyers of EVs about them “financially supporting” countries like China and Africa that supply the lithium and cobalt for those EV batteries, that lack sufficient labor laws and environmental regulations, to continue humanity atrocities against people with yellow, brown, and black skin, and environmental degradation in those developing countries, for the exotic minerals and metals to make EV batteries, JUST so the few wealthy countries with unlimited taxpayer funds can go “green”!

Failures of the renewables transition era are insults to taxpayers as the world’s population depends on insulation, wires, computers, and fertilizers that “renewables” cannot provide. The ideology of “net-zero emissions,” while politically appealing, is in practice destructive to future generations. By discouraging the construction of new refineries and processing facilities in developed countries, it undermines the very foundations of the supply chain that delivers essential fuels and products to society. If this trajectory continues, the outcome will not be a cleaner or safer world, but rather one marked by shortages, rising costs, and declining living standards for billions of people.

So the question as to how to meet the growing demand for electricity then becomes … how to continue to add continuous, uninterruptible, and reliable sources of electricity, to feed the growing global demand for a constantly increasing amounts of energy? The future is looking increasingly bright for Small Modular Reactors (SMRs).

Amazon recently announced that it is helping to build one of the first Small Modular Nuclear Reactors in the U.S. SMRs are next-generation nuclear reactors. They are much smaller than traditional nuclear reactors, and are specifically designed to enable simpler design, faster deployment, and lower construction costs.

• “This project isn’t just about new technology; it’s about creating a reliable source of carbon-free electricity that will support our growing digital world,” said Kara Hurst, Amazon’s chief sustainability officer. “I’m excited about the potential of SMRs and the positive impact they will have on both the environment and local communities.”

Seems that zero-emissions ideologists are Energy Blind as all their electricity generation so-called “solutions” are all made with parts and components made from fossil fuels. ALL six methods for the generation of electricity from coal, natural gas, hydro, nuclear, wind, and solar are ALL built with the products, components, and equipment that are made from oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil. Without fossil fuels there would be no so-called renewables!

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

[BIO: Tom Kirkman is an experienced international project manager in oil and gas and energy, a former volunteer moderator on the Oilpro forum and Oil Price forum, and prolific short form writer on LinkedIn. Tom has been a guest on numerous international Energy and Project Management podcasts.]

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Why are Developing Economies Pursuing Small Modular Reactors?

Co-authored by Ronald Stein, Dr Robert Jeffrey and Olivia Vaughan

December 11, 2025

Resurgence of nuclear generated electricity is occurring in South Africa to serve over 565 million Sub-Saharan Africans lacking electricity access.

The global electricity debate has reached a critical impasse. While developed nations debate the finer points of renewable electricity portfolios, like how much profit is being made, billions of people in the world remain trapped in electricity poverty. For half of the world’s people living on less than $10 per day—and particularly the 565 million Sub-Saharan Africans without electricity—the conversation about electricity must be grounded in pragmatism, not ideology.

The US has recently signed an economic and Defense Partnership with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia that includes civilian nuclear energy.

South Africa expects to lift the care and maintenance status of its Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) by the first quarter of next year or even earlier. Alternative sources of stable, continuous electricity, in this instance provided by SMR units, will benefit as environmental trends increasingly move towards green technologies. These technologies, because of cost and price trends, will become increasingly economic and cost-effective in the future.

A comprehensive economic impact study of South Africa’s small modular reactor (SMR) deployment strategy, undertaken by one of the authors of this report, reveals what is at stake when developing nations pursue practical electricity solutions that can generate continuous, uninterruptable and emission free electricity. The findings offer a compelling blueprint for how SMR technology could transform not just electricity access, but entire economies.

Nations need dispatchable electricity. What is often forgotten is that all developed and developing nations require dispatchable electricity to maximise economic growth and efficiency. The purpose is to maximise benefits for their citizens by raising their standard of living, reducing unemployment and poverty. Dispatchable electricity means that sufficient electricity is available immediately on demand by businesses and the public, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Energy sources must first be examined on their ability to meet this criterion. Using South Africa as the example, the primary alternative electricity sources that need to be examined are:

• Firstly, renewable energy sources in the form of wind and solar that are renowned for their unreliability and unpredictable intermittency, and,
• Secondly, fossil fuels in the form of coal and gas, and
• Thirdly, nuclear power.

The Reality Check Beyond Wind and Solar

When visiting a modern hospital or airport, consider everything you see that didn’t exist 200 years ago: the plastic chairs, synthetic fabrics, medical devices, computer components, pharmaceuticals, and countless other products. Many of which are essential for maintaining one’s own family and home. Now ask yourself: can any of these items be manufactured by a wind turbine or solar array?

The answer exposes a fundamental flaw in current electricity discourse. Oil, gas, and coal aren’t just fuel sources—they’re raw materials for petrochemicals, plastics, pharmaceuticals, fertilizers, construction, infrastructure and thousands of essential products. The modern world’s material foundation depends on hydrocarbons as manufacturing feedstock to support the supply chain for those essential products.

This distinction matters enormously for developing economies. While wealthy nations can afford to experiment with intermittent renewable sources, backed by existing infrastructure and capital reserves built as a result of the use of fossil fuels now being shunned, developing countries need reliable, continuous power to build industries, create jobs, and lift people from poverty. These policies being set have all the requirements to set a global economic reality of keeping the rich developed world rich and the poor developing world poor. In practice, the “green” policies in the richer countries will negatively affect the economic growth of both the developed world and the developing world.

The resurgence of nuclear-generated electricity is occurring in many countries. The reasons are not difficult to find. The benefits of nuclear power have shown themselves in many ways. Nuclear has proven itself to be: Safe, there have been very few injuries. It is environmentally benign, has very small land use, discharges no pollutants and produces little waste. It is reliable and has a capacity factor of over 90%. It is energy-dense and scalable. It is economical with a long life and low running costs. South Africa’s Koeberg Power Station has had a long life and is one of the most economical power stations in the country. It is a foundation for other applications, and its Safari reactor is a world’s major commercial producers of medical and industrial radioisotopes.

Numbers That Transform Nations

The economic analysis of SMR deployment, yet to be formally released, demonstrates transformative potential:

♦ GDP Impact: Within two decades of operation, an SMR program would contribute approximately R74 billion (roughly $4.3billion USD) annually to GDP, representing 1.1% of South Africa’s baseline GDP. This is significant growth for the economy. It is an economy-altering development.
♦ Employment Creation: The program would generate, within ten years of becoming operational, over 33,000 direct jobs and over 154,000 indirect jobs. The following decade, it will have created almost 350,000 jobs within two decades, supporting over 1.4 million people. These aren’t temporary construction positions, but sustained employment in high-skill manufacturing, engineering, and operations.
♦ Skills Development: Unlike fossil fuel extraction or installations of wind turbines or solar panels, nuclear technology demands—and develops—a highly skilled workforce. An SMR program would create a permanent increase in technical capabilities, helping retain talent while attracting international expertise.
♦ Trade Balance: Long-term projections show an ongoing current account surplus of approximately R8 billion ($9.4 billion USD) annually, as exported SMR units and associated services generate hard currency for the developing economy.
♦ Tax Revenue: Annual tax generation would exceed R19 billion ($1.1 billion USD), with annual remuneration associated with these jobs approaching R33 billion ($1.9 billion USD)—funds that fuel further development, education, and healthcare improvements.

Why Small Modular Reactors?

Traditional large-scale nuclear plants require massive upfront capital, decade-long construction periods, and proximity to major grid infrastructure. For developing economies like South Africa, these barriers are often insurmountable. Countries in Africa are exceptionally large, a fact that is little known and often overlooked by so-called overseas experts.

SMRs offer a different pathway to electricity. Modern designs—such as helium-cooled, graphite-moderated reactors using advanced fuel configurations—exemplify the advantages:

♦ Scalability: Units can be deployed incrementally, matching investment capacity and demand growth. A typical rollout could envision four domestic units annually within years of initial deployment, rising to eight exported units within two decades.
♦ Flexibility: Smaller SMR units can be located closer to demand centers, reducing transmission losses and infrastructure costs. They’re ideal for industrial process heat applications, such as powering chemical facilities or electricity generation in regions far from existing power stations.
♦ Safety: Passive safety features and simpler designs reduce operational risks. Modern SMR designs incorporate inherent safety characteristics that make them particularly suitable for nations building nuclear expertise.
♦ Industrial Development: Unlike imported renewable components, SMR programs build domestic manufacturing capacity. A comprehensive SMR initiative creates an entire nuclear industry value chain: development, engineering, design, and manufacturing.

The Megaproject Precedent

History validates this approach. South Africa’s Richards Bay development, Sasol’s coal-to-liquids technology, Petro SA’s gas-to-liquids technology, and automotive industry growth each transformed regional economies. SMR deployment compares favorably with projected employment to be 340,000 jobs and dependent population supporting 1.4 million people, while offering superior balance of payments outcomes.

These megaprojects succeeded because they addressed real needs with practical technology, creating sustainable industries rather than dependency on imported solutions.

Building a Nuclear Industry

SMRs represent more than power generation, they’re platforms for industrial development. A national SMR program involves the construction and operation of units for domestic markets and export, alongside the development of a local nuclear industry with significant local content.

The construction phase includes substantial localization to ensure regular long-term supply by original equipment manufacturers. This creates an entire value chain encompassing development, engineering, design, and manufacturing, significantly enlarging the manufacturing base of the economy.

The operational phase generates ongoing expenditures in wages, fuel acquisition (including nuclear fuel production), maintenance, and subcontracted services—creating permanent economic activity rather than boom-and-bust cycles associated with construction-only projects.

For countries with uranium reserves, SMRs offer additional opportunities. The technology and skills developed can extend to uranium enrichment industries, producing nuclear fuel domestically and for export, adding considerable value to natural resources.

The Path Forward

For the 565 million Sub-Saharan Africans without electricity, and billions more worldwide trapped in electricity poverty, the choice is clear. They cannot afford to gamble for their future on renewable infrastructure of wind turbines and solar panels, which are intermittent and undermine industrial development. The full lifecycle economic cost of renewable electricity projects does not support the needs of growing economies and keeps these countries trapped as consumer nations in perpetual debt cycles.

SMRs offer developing economies what they need most: reliable baseload power that builds domestic capability, creates quality employment, and establishes technology platforms for future growth. The alternative—continued electricity poverty or dependency on imported sources of energy for transportation and electrification—condemns billions to economic stagnation.

The question isn’t whether developing nations should pursue nuclear technology. It’s whether wealthier developed nations will support or obstruct that pragmatic choice. Electricity policy must serve people, not ideology. For the billions of people living on less than $10 daily, that’s not just good policy, it’s a moral imperative. The path to prosperity runs through reliable electricity. Small modular reactors can light that way.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

[BIO: Dr Robert Jeffrey is an economist, business manager and energy expert. He has a Master’s degree in economics from Cambridge, a Master’s degree in business management and holds a PhD in Engineering Management. He was on the economic round table advising the South African Reserve Bank

[BIO: Olivia Vaughan is a business strategist. She has a Bachelor of Commerce Cum Laude and an MBA and operates across key sectors in the circular economy, sustainable systems and the built environment. She is co-founder of a Nuclear innovation company in South Africa, Stratek Global.

Nuclear-Generated Electricity Overshadows Government-Subsidized Wind and Solar

Co-authored by Ronald Stein and David Amerine

December 6, 2025

Free enterprise provides the least expensive electricity.

In the 21st century, there is one thing that all countries and their governments, regardless of ideology, have in common: The standard of living in that country is directly a function of the availability of electricity.

Without the availability of reliable, continuous, uninterruptible, abundant electricity to power factory machinery and keep homes, offices, hospitals, and schools warm and bright, that society will suffer in its productivity and its aspirations.

In this country demand for electricity is expected to increase by 25% in the next 25 years. This increase is a function of the demands of an expanding economy and a growing population. And that 25% does not account for artificial intelligence or electric vehicle battery charging demands, which might add an additional 60% increase.

Besides being reliable and abundant, there are other traits that are desired in the sources of electricity.

• Available on demand 24/7.
• Safe for both the public and the electrical plant workers,
• Relatively inexpensive,
• Environmentally benign with minimal footprint requirements and zero emissions.

Recently, the concern for the environment has resulted in the promotion of so-called renewables, such as solar panels and wind turbines. Thus, a look at the traits of solar panels and wind turbines.

• Without government subsidies, wind and solar sources of electricity cannot compete with other sources.
• Of the more than 400,000 wind turbines installed worldwide, virtually NONE has been financed solely with private investment money.
• They are 100% dependent on favorable weather conditions; thus, their electricity is NOT available on demand 24/7.
• Wind and solar, like hydro, coal, natural gas, and nuclear, are ALL built with the products, components, and equipment that are made from oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil, thus all electricity comes AFTER oil.
• Massive Land Use Requirements: Wind and solar power require up to 10 times more land per unit of electricity than coal or natural gas.
• Wildlife and Habitat Impacts: Wind turbines are linked to habitat fragmentation and harm to bird, bat, and potentially whale populations, while solar farms displace wildlife and disrupt migratory patterns.
• Material and Mining Concerns: Solar panels, wind turbines, and batteries depend heavily on critical minerals often mined in countries with poor environmental and labor standards.
• Limited Lifespan and Recycling Challenges: Wind and solar infrastructure have shorter lifespans (20–25 years) than natural gas (40 years) or nuclear plants (40–80 years).
• Perhaps the most damming aspect of wind and solar as a source of electricity is their unreliability. A so-called “dunkelflaute” in Germany reduces the installed wind and solar capacities of 174 GW to only one GW, and this can last for several days.
• Unlike nuclear plants, neither wind nor solar are required to pay for their disposition or clean-up upfront. Decommissioned materials are rarely recycled and often end up in landfills. Ratepayers will have to pick up that bill after their useful life.

The merits of nuclear power to produce electricity overshadow government-subsidized electricity generation from wind and solar.

• Nuclear production of electricity is environmentally benign, reliable, affordable, land-efficient and generating zero emissions.
• Nuclear power is energy dense by comparison to other sources of electricity. One fuel pellet, the size of a finger to its first bend (approximately one inch long and a little more than a quarter inch in diameter), equals 120 gallons of oil, one ton of coal, or seventeen thousand cubic feet of natural gas.
• Nuclear power has no detrimental impact on the environment, with no hazardous discharges.
A major trait of nuclear-generated electricity is that it is safe.
• The U.S. Navy has a 70-year record with ALL its aircraft carriers and submarines being powered by nuclear, with no fatalities or accidents.
• No American citizen has ever been harmed by nuclear, something no other energy source can say.
• The operators, engineers, maintenance personnel, and others at the nuclear plants are the most tightly screened and monitored workforce anywhere.
• They are highly trained and value safety and quality over production, schedule, and cost.
• They practice what is called a Safety Conscious Work Environment (SCWE) where any employee can bring up any issue without fear of retribution and with confidence that the concern or suggestion will be evaluated on only its merit.
• The plant design and work practices at Chernobyl would not be licensed or permitted in the United States.
• The Institute for Nuclear Power Operations (INPO), created after Three Mile Island, has promoted the sharing of best practices and lessons learned between the nuclear utilities.
• INPO provides second oversight in addition to scrutiny of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
• Additionally, all nuclear power plants must pass reviews by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) proving they can respond and mitigate a highly unlikely nuclear accident.
• A key advantage of nuclear power plants is their long life. Roughly three times longer than wind or solar. The wind turbines max out at 10 years of life.

That so-called nuclear waste, commonly referred to as Slightly Used Nuclear Fuel (SUNF), is a non-issue since there is very little of it produced during power operation. The spent fuel is presently being safely stored on various nuclear plant sites.

The nuclear fuel assemblies are removed from the reactor with approximately 95% of their uranium load still available. This is done based on very conservative calculations of irradiation stress of the zirconium rods that house the fuel pellets. The fuel assemblies are removed before they can experience stress cracking and leak fission fragments to the primary coolant. (Even if that were to happen, there are still two more barriers between the primary system and atmosphere.)

When we finally start to recycle and reprocess the spent fuel assemblies (SUNF) using fast-reactor technology, most of the uranium and actinides will be converted to power and very valuable, short-lived fission products. Fast-reactor recycling of SUNF will extend our fuel supplies for several centuries. When adding the stockpiled, depleted uranium as fast-reactor fuel, power production could be extended almost indefinitely.

The next generation of reactors, usually referred to as GEN IV reactors, provides additional safety considerations over the present GEN III reactor designs. Passive shutdown characteristics, much lower operating pressures, and even the use of eutectic primary cooling should make these reactors much less expensive due to less robust containments and fewer redundant safety systems. Applications to Small Modular Reactor (SMR), factory construction and assembly, underground construction, and other considerations should lower costs considerably. Reducing the time to operation will increase the realization of the revenue stream.

There are several challenges, including enhancing enrichment capabilities, domestic uranium mining, revitalizing the supply chain, and ensuring quality assurance, that would be solved if we would just go to a free enterprise system. Additionally, streamlining regulations, augmenting the workforce, and educating the public about the benefits and safety of nuclear power would be beneficial.

The one thing that is needed is a cogent, consistent, coherent national electricity strategy, a plan that bridges regime changes and has bipartisan support. Our leaders need to recognize the importance of an electricity strategy that supports a robust, stable, and resilient electrical grid and electricity supply to our overall well-being and security. Nuclear-generated electricity, which is fundamental to a secure future and an increasing standard of living for America, is by far the best choice but the biggest detriment (other than the NRC) is government involvement.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

[BIO: David Amerine is a United States Naval Academy graduate. He served as the President of Nuclear Fuel Services, which is vital to national security as the sole producer of fuel for our nuclear Navy, brought in to lead its recovery from an NRC mandated suspension of operations. Today, David continues to advise top nuclear agencies and organizations, and is a sought-after consultant, coach, and speaker.]

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

California Governor Newsom Remains Oblivious That Electricity Came About AFTER Oil

By Ronald Stein, PE

November 28, 2025

All the parts and components to generate electricity are based on oil derivatives refined from raw crude oil.

The State of California sent a large delegation to the Conference of the Parties (COP) in Belém, Brazil, including California Governor Gavin Newsom and top officials from the California Natural Resources Agency, Department of Food and Agriculture, Air Resources Board, Public Utilities Commission and Governor’s office of Tribal Affairs.

Interestingly, the leaders of the world’s most-polluting countries – China, India, and Russia decided to skip this year’s COP30 climate summit in Belém, Brazil.

Newsom told the L.A Times that he “absolutely” sees California as a proxy for the U.S. at the COP30 conference, which is the main global venue for countries to strengthen their commitments to reducing green-house gases from fossil fuels.

Newsom remains unaware that the demand by humanity for more than 6,000 products and transportation fuels is the only reason for using crude oil! To stop climate change, Newsom wants to stop the world! Ceasing the use of products and transportation fuels is the only known way to rid the world of crude oil usage.

The global population has surged from 1 to over 8 billion in less than 200 years. This growth has been supported by the dramatic increase in the number of products and transportation fuels made from oil, and food production made possible by synthetic fertilizers, all of which did not exist before the 1800’s, just a few hundred years ago.

He remains oblivious to the fact that wind turbines and solar panels can ONLY generate electricity but CANNOT make any products for the 8 billion on this planet. Without a replacement for oil, he wants the world to go back to the 1800’s by reducing the world’s product usage, which translates to promoting the reduction in the number and size of hospitals, airports, and militaries around the world.

With the world’s population projected to grow beyond 9.5 billion by 2050, rather than focusing on wind and solar to generate electricity, Newsom should be inspiring humanity to review and control its materialistic demands toward a viable future for all humans, animals, and plant life on this planet.

Newsom has no clue that a replacement to crude oil has YET to be identified to maintain the supply chain of all the products and various transportation fuels demanded by the world’s 40,000 planes, 100,000 ships, 1.4 million automobiles, and hundreds of millions of commercial vehicles in operation worldwide.

Newsom cannot comprehend that the one thing that’s going to kill billions on this planet in running out of crude oil before we’ve identified its replacement to support the supply chain of products and transportation fuels demanded by humanity. Even the grease he uses to comb his slick hair is made from crude oil.

The 70,000 attendees at the COP30 in Brazil, including Newsom and his entourage, are OBLIVIOUS that electricity came AFTER oil, as ALL electrical generation methods from hydro, coal, natural gas, nuclear, wind, and solar are ALL built with the products, components, and equipment that are made from oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil.

• Without Crude Oil there can be no Electricity!

• Without Crude Oil there will be no products like iPhones, X-ray machines, computers, etc., that NEEDS electricity!

The world extracts from Mother Earth over 100 million barrels of oil per day, while the United States consumes around 20 million barrels daily. That oil is not being replenished, and those poorer developing countries want to be “like us”, thus worldwide extraction rates may increase to meet the demands of humanity for all 8 billion now on this planet.

Obviously, Newsom and world leaders are all in favor of ridding the world of crude oil usage, BUT we have yet to identify a clone or replacement to oil that will support our materialistic needs for all the products and transportation fuels that allowed the world to populate from 1 to 8 billion in less than 200 years.

Thus, without crude oil or its replacement, to support the supply chain of products MADE from oil, Newsom wants the world going back to the pre-1800’s when the world did not have all those products and transportation fuels.

Newsom is proudly sharing that the Golden State has invested heavily into wind turbines and solar panels that ONLY generate electricity under favorable weather conditions, as well as for the storage of electricity and the electrification of buildings and vehicles.

California has also set ambitious decarbonization targets. California has also forged subnational agreements and partnerships with other regions and countries on issues such as delivering clean transportation, cutting pollution and developing hydrogen, wind and sol, BUT Newsom continues to be unaware to identify the replacement for crude oil that provides the supply chain basis for all the parts and components to accomplish all of his net-zero emissions ideology.

The COP30 attendees need to focus on the reality that the wealthier and healthier countries, can co-exist with the poorer and less healthy countries that are enslaving labor in mines and factories to provide the exotic minerals and metals required for the green energy technologies for the construction of EV batteries, solar panels, and wind turbines, and with the Saudis and Russians for the oil demands of wealthier nations.

Newsom is unaware that humanity exists in all weather extremes of the world, from the hot and dry Sahara Desert to the frigid northern hemispheres. The animal kingdom has adjusted to climate change over billions of years, and now humanity, without a replacement for raw crude oil, may need to use the tools provided by oil products and fuels to master the continuous climate change adjustment challenges.

While California Governor Newsom remains oblivious to all the above, he wants to run for President of the United States!

Please share this information with your friends to encourage energy literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

The True Source of Civilization’s Future is Energy Wisdom

Co-authored by Armando Cavanha (Brazil), Ronald Stein (USA), and Yoshihiro Muronaka (Japan)

November 19, 2025

A Cross-Cultural Reflection on Efficiency, Ethics, and Life to support civilization growth.

Energy wisdom—not energy denial—is the foundation of sustainable civilization. Three industry leaders share their individual thoughts on the state of energy, and then collectively join forces for a powerful conclusion.

Introduction (Armando Cavanha of Brazil)

Twenty-five years ago, Professor Franco Battaglia wrote a provocative essay claiming that “pursuing energy saving is a foolish idea.” He argued that as efficiency improves, people inevitably consume more energy, and that prosperity itself depends on greater energy use.

“The more energy we use,” he said, “the better our well-being.” To save energy, therefore,

would mean to live worse.

Yet the statement “The first source of energy is saving” still resonates. It invites a reinterpretation, not as an economic contradiction, but as a moral and civilizational question. True saving is not deprivation; it is intelligence in utilization—the conscious alignment between human purpose and the limited natural resources of this 4-billion-year-old Planet Earth.

In today’s world, obsessed with carbon neutrality and net-zero slogans, this idea becomes urgent. The challenge is not simply to consume less, but to consume wisely—to rediscover saving as an ethical act that integrates science, culture, and respect for life.

Efficiency and Saving (Yoshihiro Muronaka of Japan)

For an engineer, the distinction between efficiency and saving is fundamental.

• Efficiency is a design challenge: achieving a task with the minimum input through better engineering.
• Saving, on the other hand, is often a behavioral practice: using less through habit or restraint.

Japan’s experience after the 1970s oil crisis illustrates this well. Instead of moralizing about sacrifice, industries pursued technical excellence—the Top Runner approach.

They designed machines, appliances, and industrial systems to achieve maximum performance per unit of energy. In doing so, saving became a byproduct of innovation, not a constraint on it.

But to understand the deeper meaning of saving, we must remember that products, transportation fuels, and electricity are not the purpose of civilization, it is a means to serve life. They exist to serve a purpose, to enable human life and creativity. When engineers design a process—whether a factory, a power plant, or even a kitchen stove—the goal is never “to consume energy,” but to achieve the intended function with elegance and precision.

Consider the act of cooking. A mother preparing dinner for her family adjusts the flame according to each ingredient—sometimes it is strong, sometimes gentle, sometimes paused. Every material, every process, has its optimal time and rhythm.

The art of engineering is similar: finding the point where nothing is wasted, and every bit of energy fulfills its role. Designers and manufacturers think about these details long before the process begins—choosing materials that are robust but not heavy, that conduct heat well, that do not cause food to stick to the pan, and that are easy to clean.

Every decision reflects a search for harmony between purpose and performance. True efficiency is not just in the moment of use, but in the thoughtfulness that shapes the entire lifecycle of the tool.

When the engineer’s intention—to design for perfect efficiency—meets the hand of the mother cooking with love, the story of energy finds its completion.

Technology and humanity have become one. Energy, at that moment, fulfills its true role—not as a master, but as a humble servant in the story of life.

The Resource Reality (Ronald Stein USA)

While policymakers promote “net zero” illusions, the real challenge is material: our civilization depends on finite, non-recyclable resources. Every year, humanity consumes about 35 billion barrels of oil, 8.5 billion tons of coal, and 132 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

These are not renewable flows but one-time gifts of the Earth—and they sustain more than 6,000 products essential to modern life: medical devices, fertilizers, computers, transportation, clothing, and even the food chain itself for the 8 billion now living on this Planet.

Solar panels and wind turbines cannot produce any materials demanded by our materialistic society. They depend on them. Every renewable system requires mining, metallurgy, logistics, and manufacturing powered by hydrocarbons.

Eliminating fossil fuels without viable replacements is not just impractical, it is morally irresponsible. It would condemn billions to poverty, hunger, and disease, returning humanity to pre-industrial conditions.

The true moral imperative is not to abandon energy, but to use it wisely, preserve it efficiently, and develop new forms responsibly.

Energy is a utility that sustains civilization. The tragedy of today’s debate is that many leaders treat affordable energy as a villain, forgetting that without it there is no economy, no medicine, no education, no comfort, and no dignity.

Toward Energy Wisdom (Joint Conclusion)

From Franco Battaglia’s challenge to Armando Cavanha’s reinterpretation, and from Ronald Stein’s energy literacy to Yoshihiro Muronaka’s engineering vision, a coherent message emerges: Energy wisdom—not energy denial—is the foundation of sustainable civilization.

Energy efficiency, behavioral awareness, and moral responsibility are not contradictions; they are the three dimensions of maturity in how humanity relates to nature.

Efficiency seeks to perfect the means. Savings seeks to harmonize purpose and needs. Wisdom seeks to align technology, ethics, and life.

Our task is not to glorify scarcity or excess, but to rediscover balance.

Energy is not an enemy to be defeated, nor an idol to be worshiped. It is a faithful companion on the human journey—a silent partner in every heartbeat of civilization.

As we face the great transitions of the 21st century, may our leaders learn this simple truth:

“The future of humanity will not be secured by denying energy, but by mastering the wisdom to use it responsibly.”

Please share this information with your friends to encourage energy literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

[BIO: Armando Cavanha A Brazilian executive and researcher with degrees in AI, logistics, business, and engineering. Former PETROBRAS leader and CEO of Thompson Knight Global Energy Services. Author and host of the “Cafe com Cavanha” channel.]

[BIO: Yoshihiro Muronaka, P.E.Jp is a chemical engineer who currently focuses on evaluating net-zero and decarbonization policies, advocating alternative energy concepts such as “carbon symbiosis,” and promoting balanced international energy cooperation.]

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

The Different Worlds of Wealthy Nations and Developing Countries

Co-authored by Ronald Stein, P.E. and Vijay Jayaraj

November 14, 2025

The “green” mandates and subsidies are only affordable by the prosperous developed nations

There is a tight correlation between poverty and “deprivation” of the entire range of basic products and services that are taken for granted by wealthier citizens. A personal car is the iconic energy-dependent product that is highly correlated with freedom of mobility and independence, as well as improved personal and national economic outcomes. In the United States, there are roughly 800 cars for every 1,000 people; in poorer developing nations, there are only a few cars for every 1,000 people.

Much of the rhetoric one hears from representatives of wealthy nations at global gatherings is focused on the goal of lowering global CO2 emissions. Such a singular focus not only ignores the realities of multidimensional environmental issues, but more importantly ignores energy poverty and the central need for access to a sufficient supply of affordable products made from fossil fuels, and affordable electricity. This is the only way to increase well-being everywhere and reduce destructive global disparity. For the foreseeable future, much of the energy to achieve this will come from oil, natural gas, and coal.

The high price of wind and solar deployed just to generate electricity at society-scale illustrates an important cost of supply principle. Because everyone needs affordable and reliable energy—whether electricity, gasoline, diesel, aviation, or heating fuel—the higher the overall costs, the more damaging it is proportionally for those who can least afford it.

Economic growth is propelled by imagination and invention. Many processes are made possible by the ability of fossil fuels to deliver the extremely high heat required to fabricate cement, steel, and other vital materials, and as feedstock for many critical materials, not least of which are fertilizers and plastics. The latter, while often vilified, are essential in a myriad of products, including in medical domains and vehicles of all kinds.

Improving the well-being of the billions on this planet who live in poverty will vastly increase the demand for, and thus the energy associated with, all conventional products and services from home heating and cooling, to transportation, healthcare, and more. Then, in wealthy nations there is a further effect on energy demands from continued invention of new kinds of products and services.

Making products and services more energy-efficient effectively makes them more affordable and accessible for more people and thus increases overall energy demand around the world.

Policymakers in wealthy nations recognize that outsourcing to emerging nations the mining of basic materials, the refining of those materials, and the manufacturing of associated components simply shifts CO2 emissions somewhere else. More than half the world’s CO2 emissions come from Asian nations, which also produce more than half of the world’s goods. Similarly, mining has in recent decades increasingly shifted to emerging economies, many with fragile or often compromised political and social structures. Dependence on imports does not make the world “greener”, it just moves environmental and other impacts elsewhere.

When wealthy economies export the production of minerals and metals to less wealthy nations, they impose environmental impacts and the exploitation of human atrocities on those developing countries.

We want our products to be inexpensive, but it is naïve and myopic to ignore the reality that those products are being produced using coal-fired electricity and energy for the 21st Century coal-fueled manufacturing, transported by diesel burning trucks and ships to stores and front doors.

All products and goods are moved into markets on transportation equipment using oil somewhere in the supply chains; overall, petroleum powers over 95% of global transportation. Exporting industrial and environmental challenges from wealthy to developing countries is not a solution, it is a “shell game”.

Thus, while wealthy Europe and the United States have spent more than two decades and trillions of dollars trying to “transition” from fossil fuels to reduce CO2 emissions, the fact is that global emissions have risen, predictably.

The history of foundational innovations is not correlated with, nor does it arise from, mandates or subsidies. Subsidies and mandates tend to lock in yesterday’s technologies.

The building of EV’s has two distinctive features, the motor and battery, that requires about 500% more specialty metals and minerals that are mined, refined, and transported around the globe using hydrocarbons, as well as more energy-intensive aluminum in the vehicle body to offset the weight of a typically half-ton EV battery.

There is, similarly, a huge increase in critical metals needed to fabricate wind and solar hardware, compared with conventional fossil fuel electricity production. That translates into far more mining of earth natural resources, which is not green, regardless of labels and aspirations—and often done in poorer, less regulated countries where human rights violations and environmental degradation are all too common.

No energy system is “renewable”, because all machines that access, convert, move, and store energy—drilling rigs, dams, mining trucks, wind turbines, solar panels, trains, boats, planes, pipelines, batteries, electronics, and beyond—wear out, produce waste, and require replacement and disposal of materials, some of which can be hazardous.

Recycling consumes energy, takes time, is limited in terms of useful recovery, and is often more expensive than producing something new. That is why the idea of a “circular economy” with near-perfect recycling is profoundly unrealistic, and even with aggressive recycling, there remains the challenge of new supplies needed to meet net new demands that come with growing economies.

Society needs simultaneously: products and electricity that are affordable and reliable for the 8 billion on this planet. Energy for the 21st Century and that minimizes overall environmental impacts. The real impediments to progress are an underlying obliviousness to energy realities and associated denial of trade-offs.

Furthermore, the impact on land, materials, and water tends to:

• Decrease with denser forms of energy such as hydrocarbons and nuclear, and
• Increase with less dense energy such as wind, solar, biomass, and batteries.

Delivering useful energy to society is made possible by technologies that can capture natural forces and materials and convert them into a useful form.

Forecasting long-term possibilities for supplies of products and electricity are thus determined by future innovations that can take advantage of the underlying scale of those primary natural resources. Scientific estimates of those quantities illuminate the reality that enormous amounts of energy may exist in the natural world around us for several centuries, but quantifiable, they’re without replacement of those natural resources on this 4-billion-year-old planet earth.

The central challenge of our time is thus illuminated by the simple fact that about one fourth of the world’s population accounts for three-fourths of global GDP. Our goal for the coming century should be to ensure that the whole population, both the less fortunate in already developed countries as well as those in emerging and developing nations, can obtain the material wealth and social conditions enabled by low-cost, abundant and affordable energy, and in so doing have the economic wherewithal to invest in environmental protection. That will require significantly more energy to address the needs of ALL 8 billion on this planet.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

[BIO: Vijay Jayaraj is a Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Virginia. He holds a master’s degree in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia, U.K. His focus area is on the intersection of environment, energy policy and development, particularly in developing countries.]

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Products, Fuel, and Electricity Are the Real Climate Challenges For the Future

By Ronald Stein, PE

November 8, 2025

So-called “renewables” CANNOT exist without products made from fossil fuels.

A global challenge exists today in reconciling the conflict between policies seeking to ensure that society is provided with affordable and reliable products to generate electricity for everyone, while at the same time protecting the environment everywhere.

The sheer scale of humanity’s needs today adds urgency to the truism that “quantity has a quality all its own”. To feed, shelter, move, educate, and power civilization, humanity acquires and uses some 100 billion tons of earth’s natural resources annually.

Barring some unforeseen, catastrophic natural or human-caused disaster, the global population of 8 billion will continue to grow for many decades, especially in lower-income, emerging nations.

Today oil, coal, and natural gas are the basis of over 80% of all global demand for the products and transportation fuels that did not exist before the 1800’s.

Today, policymakers setting “green” and “zero emissions” policies are oblivious to the reality that electricity came about AFTER the discovery of oil. Without oil, there would be no products like wire, insulation, and computers to generate electricity!
So-called “renewables, ONLY generate electricity but CANNOT make anything. In addition, everything that NEEDS Electricity is made with petrochemicals manufactured from crude oil, coal, or natural gas.

Despite a decline in extreme poverty, broader measures show that of the more than 8 billion living on this planet, Nearly Half the World Lives on Less than $5.50 a Day, as billions still struggle to meet basic needs. To put the above into perspective for the wealthy locations pursuing a clean and green movement:

California has about 0.4% of the world’s population, which means that 99.6% of the 8 billion on this planet live outside of California.
America has about 4% of the world’s population, which means that 96% of the 8 billion on this planet live outside of the USA.

Thus, bogus myths by the few wealthy countries have been created to promote renewables that are supposedly green and kind to the environment, cheap, and will replace fossil fuels.

ALL six methods for the generation of electricity from coal, natural gas, hydro, nuclear, wind, and solar are ALL built with the products, components, and equipment that are made from oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil.
All EV’s, solar panels, and wind turbines are also built with the products, components, and equipment that are made from the oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil. Without fossil fuels there would be no so-called renewables!
Everything that needs electricity to function like iPhones, computers, data centers, and X-Ray machines are all made with petrochemicals manufactured from crude oil. Without fossil fuels, there would be nothing that needs electricity!

History and reality suggest a desire for economic growth everywhere which, invariably, leads to the need for more, not less, products and electricity for a growing materialistic society.

There is a very strong correlation, both historically and globally, between access to affordable, reliable electricity, and the realization of safety, comfort, convenience, and beauty—what we call human flourishing. Yet, globally, there is an enormous spread between the per capita consumption in developed nations compared with poorer nations that are developing or still emerging.

Higher fossil fuel costs make products and services more expensive. Income determines a person or family’s ability to purchase goods and services, starting with the basics of food, clothing, and shelter, and evolving to plumbing, heating, and cooling. It also determines access to many things citizens in wealthier nations take for granted, such as cars, education, sanitation, healthcare, and leisure.

There is a tight correlation between poverty and “deprivation” of the entire range of basic products and services that are taken for granted by wealthier citizens. A personal car is the iconic energy-dependent product that is highly correlated with freedom of mobility, as well as improved personal and national economic outcomes. In the United States, there are roughly 800 cars for every 1,000 people; in poorer nations, there are only a few cars for every 1,000 people.

Much of the rhetoric one hears from representatives of wealthy nations at global gatherings is focused on the goal of lowering global CO2 emissions. Such a singular focus not only ignores the realities of multidimensional environmental issues, but more importantly ignores energy poverty and the central need for access to a sufficient supply of affordable electricity. This is the only way to increase well-being everywhere and reduce destructive global disparity. For the foreseeable future, much of the energy to achieve this will come from oil, natural gas, and coal.

The high price of electricity from wind and solar deployed at society-scale illustrates an important cost of supply principle. Because everyone needs affordable and reliable energy—whether the products made from oil, electricity, gasoline, diesel, aviation, or heating fuel—the higher the overall costs, the more damaging it is proportionally for those who can least afford it.

Improving the well-being of the billions who live in poverty will vastly increase the demand for, and thus the energy associated with, all conventional products and services from home heating and cooling, to transportation, healthcare, sanitation, and more. Then, in wealthy nations there is a further effect on energy demands from continued invention of new kinds of products and services.

Making products and services more energy-efficient effectively makes them more affordable and accessible for more people and thus increases overall energy demand.

When wealthy economies export production of minerals and metals, they impose environmental impacts and the exploitation of human atrocities on less wealthy nations.

Economic, political, and science and technology guiding principles for the 21st Century:

Economics

Lifting up those in poverty to alleviate suffering and promote human dignity requires more products to generate affordable and reliable electricity and fuels for transportation.
Human flourishing requires more electricity that is less expensive, continuous, and more reliable, not less electricity that is more expensive and less reliable.
In the pursuit of flourishing, humans continually invent new products and services made from the oil derivatives manufactured from oi, many of which necessarily use electricity.

Politics

Electricity security is a top priority for global leaders, revealed in their actions, if not always their words.
When wealthy economies export electricity production, they impose environmental impacts and humanity atrocities on less wealthy nations.
Government mandates and/or excessive intrusion in markets stifles electricity generation innovation, options, and freedoms.

Science and Technology

Capturing and delivering electricity to society is about inventing, building, and perfecting technologies based on what physics, natural resources, and engineering allow.
All society-scale electricity generating systems have cost and environmental trade-offs.
The earth’s natural resources available to support electricity generation is fundamentally limited.

We must remember, for the present and future, that all 8 billion living on this planet represent a materialistic society, and that electricity CANNOT exist without the products made from fossil fuels, and that so-called “renewables” CANNOT make any products or fuels.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

Green Delusionists Attending COP30 Are Clueless of Their Renewable Idealism

Co-authored by Ronald Stein, PE and Yoshihiro Muronaka, PE Jp

November 4, 2025

The COP30 attendees in Brazil do not comprehend that JUST electricity generated from wind and solar, will negatively impact humanity demands for the products based on fossil fuels.

The Conference of the Parties (COP30) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) will take place from November 10-21, 2025, in Belém, Brazil with an expected attendance of 70,000.

Across the world, political leaders and environmental activists proclaim that renewable electricity will soon replace fossil fuels and usher in a cleaner, sustainable future. Yet few of them can explain how wind turbines and solar panels, which only generate electricity, can sustain the vast web of products and materials upon which human civilization depends. This blind faith in renewables has become what can only be called a green delusion.

Electricity may run our computers, light our cities, and power our vehicles, but it cannot create the raw materials needed to build those very machines.

Steel, cement, plastics, fertilizers, and pharmaceuticals all require hydrocarbons—not simply as fuels but as essential feedstocks. Oil, natural gas, and coal are the molecular foundations for over 6,000 everyday products that define modern life. Without them, hospitals would lack sterile equipment, farmers would lose fertilizers, and the construction of roads, bridges, and homes would grind to a halt.

This misunderstanding, treating electricity as interchangeable with materials, is the central flaw of the green movement. Electricity is a utility, not a substance. It drives processes but cannot itself make things. Even basic metals like iron and copper require carbon as a reducing agent during smelting. Without carbon, humanity would lose the very means of transforming minerals into usable materials.

Meanwhile, governments pour trillions of dollars into policies designed to eliminate fossil fuels, without considering the economic or physical realities. In California, for example, leaders boast about renewable progress while importing electricity from neighboring states that rely on natural gas and coal. Blackouts, surging prices, and industrial flight are the inevitable consequences of this ideological experiment.

The same contradiction appears globally. Electric vehicles are celebrated as zero-emission solutions, yet their manufacture depends heavily on fossil fuels—from the mining of lithium and cobalt with diesel-powered equipment to the production of steel, glass, and plastic components derived from hydrocarbons. The result is more ways to use fossil fuels which is a carbon shift, not a carbon elimination.

Government mandated winners and losers are only applicable to those few in the wealthier countries that can afford huge subsidies, but the reality is that there are no silver bullet answers.

For those outside the few wealthy countries, we see that at least 80 percent of humanity, or more than six billion in this world are living on less than $10 a day, and billions living with little to no access to electricity,

Those green ideologies are 100% political in the few wealthy countries that can afford to subsidize their delusions! Examples of the “green” delusion:

The “green” mandates for transitioning from ICE vehicles to EV’s would only eliminate gasoline used in ICE vehicles, which is only 1 of the more than 6,000 products made from fossil fuels. The EV, like the ICE vehicle, continues to be 100% made from those oil products, inclusive of tires, computers, wiring and insulation, and all the electronics of those so-called “zero emissions” vehicle.
None of the green illusionists, inclusive of one of its political leaders such as California Governor Gavin Newsom, can explain how wind turbines and solar panels can make any of the other 5,999 products made from oil that we see in operating hospitals, airports, offices, shopping centers, datacenters, etc. or how those renewables will support the merchant ships, cruise ships, commercial aircraft, and military aircraft on this planet that did not exist 200 years ago?

The ”green” ideological transition to renewables is a globalist suicide pact for the rest of us! Conversations are desperately needed, but the following points summarize their “explanation shortcomings”.

Their zero-emission movement is a delusion that JUST electricity generated from wind and solar can replace refineries and the crude oil that they process to support the variety of the more than 6,000 products and fuels in our materialistic society that did not exist 200 years ago.
They also remain oblivious that underground hydrocarbon resources of coal, crude oil, and natural gas are totally useless unless processed into something useful to meet the demands of humanity. Humanity needs the products, but they are incapable of identifying the substitutes for fossil fuels to provide the supply chain source for those products.
They cannot explain how wind and solar can support the 50,000 merchant ships, 20,000 commercial aircraft, 50,000 military aircraft, and more than 300 cruise ships that did not exist 200 years ago, before those fossil fuel products were developed.
They cannot comprehend that ALL electricity, from hydro, coal, natural gas, nuclear, wind, and solar come AFTER oil, as all the parts and components to make electricity are made from fossil fuels.

The path forward cannot be dictated by a centralized global plan that seeks to control the generation of electricity and economies from the top down. Each nation must be free to advance policies consistent with its own history, culture, and material realities, cooperating through mutual respect rather than imposing conformity. Humanity must rediscover balance — between progress and preservation, between innovation and responsibility, and between global ambition and local reality. That balance must also guide how nations and governments pursue electricity transitions in practice.

However, many governments, in their rush to appear green, often subsidize uneconomic projects, distorting markets and burdening taxpayers. The lesson is not that innovation should stop—it should continue vigorously—but that technology must mature before being imposed by government policy of mandates and subsidies. Engineering progress cannot be legislated into existence by politicians.

If any of the “green” delusionists are seriously considering a run for a political leadership position, or for the Presidency of the United States, such as California’s Governor Gavin Newsom,

For the COP30 attendees in Brazil that do not comprehend that JUST electricity generated from wind and solar will negatively impact humanity demands for the products, they’d best provide answers to the more than 8 billion on this planet as to how JUST electricity from wind and solar can support the supply chain of more than 6,000 products and transportation fuels to keep operating our hospitals, airports, militaries, offices, and datacenters. COP30 should serve not as a forum for ideology, but for rediscovering balance — a balance between humanity’s needs and nature’s limits.

In summary, true climate progress begins not with mandates, but with energy literacy — understanding what energy can and cannot do and respecting the balance between ambition and reality.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Yes Virginia, David Can Slay Goliath

By Ronald Stein, PE

October 17, 2025

Ukraine drone attacks on Russia’s Goliath refineries are stark warnings to all national security teams – the hearts of infrastructure are easy targets for the David’s of the world.

Recent activities by Ukraine against Russian refineries, and the incident at the Chevron Refinery in California, are exposing the vulnerability of major Goliath infrastructures being stationary targets for slaying by the David’s in the world.

The misunderstanding of “green” delusionists is treating electricity as interchangeable with materials, as it is the central flaw of the green movement. Electricity is a utility, not a substance.

Electricity drives processes but those wind turbines and solar panels cannot themselves make things. Even basic metals like iron and copper require carbon as a reducing agent during smelting. Without carbon, humanity would lose the very means of transforming minerals into usable materials.

Meanwhile, governments pour trillions of dollars into policies designed to eliminate fossil fuels, without considering the economic or physical realities that wind and solar do totally different things than crude oil processed through refineries.

Yes Virginia, electricity can charge our iPhones, light our cities, and power our computers, but electricity cannot create the raw materials needed to build those very machines.

In fact, steel, cement, plastics, fertilizers, and pharmaceuticals all require hydrocarbons—not simply as fuel but as essential feedstocks. Oil, natural gas, and coal are the molecular foundations for over 6,000 everyday products that define modern life. Without them, hospitals would lack sterile equipment, farmers would lose fertilizers, and the construction of roads, bridges, and homes would grind to a halt.

The same contradiction appears globally. Electric vehicles are celebrated as zero-emission solutions, yet their manufacture depends heavily on fossil fuels—from the mining of lithium and cobalt with diesel-powered equipment to the production of tires, insulation, electronics, steel, glass, and plastic components derived from hydrocarbons. The result is more ways to use fossil fuels which is a carbon shift, not a carbon elimination.

Government mandated winners and losers are only applicable to those few in the wealthier countries that can afford huge subsidies, but the reality is that there are no silver bullet answers.

The zero-emission movement is a delusion that JUST electricity generated from wind and solar can replace refineries and the crude oil that they process to support the variety of the more than 6,000 products and fuels in our materialistic society that did not exist 200 years ago.

As of January 1, 2025, there were 131 operable refineries in the United States according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)‘s data. This total includes traditional refineries and some facilities that produce petroleum product blending components but lack atmospheric distillation capacity.

Over the years the reduction in the number of operating refineries stems from aging infrastructure, high maintenance costs, and environmental regulations that have made smaller or less efficient plants uneconomical. Utilization rates have hovered between 85-93% annually, with 2024 seeing an average of 88%, indicating spare capacity but also highlighting vulnerabilities during peak demand or disruptions.

The number of operable refineries have large capacities and are aging and thus have generally declined over the past few decades. The majority of refineries are concentrated along the Gulf Coast, particularly in states like Texas (47), Louisiana (19), and California (18).

Building new refineries is challenging due to high costs, large land footprints that easily exceed 1,000 acres, environmental concerns, and political opposition, especially as the nation focuses its mandates and subsidies toward the generation of JUST electricity from wind turbines and solar panels. Yet wind turbines and solar panels CANNOT support the supply chain of products to build anything, even to build more wind and solar!

Government policies are difficult to reverse. Onshore and offshore wind has been tied to three goals at once: decarbonization, electricity security, and industrial revitalization. Billions in subsidies through “green” funds are already committed, while local governments and industries expect contracts and jobs from these subsidized funds.

In effect, offshore wind has become a new type of public works project. Ports, construction companies, heavy industry, and trading houses all benefit from the government mandates to build more electricity generation from wind and solar, and the governments’ financial support to build them. For politicians, it delivers regional development; for bureaucrats, it provides visible progress. Under these conditions, the withdrawal of corporate America investments is treated as a temporary setback and prompts no policy review.

Ukraine, the David trying to slay Goliath Russia, has been demonstrating via drone attacks at the heart of Russia’s military and economy, by attacking Russian refineries that provide the fuels for their Goliath empire.

By chance, in October 2025 the Chevron refinery in Southern California had an apparent leak that ignited and temporarily ceased production of 40% of the jet fuel demanded in Southern California. The Ukrainian drone attacks on Russian refineries and the Chevron incident are strong messages to America’s national security team that Goliath infrastructures are easy targets for “David”.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Together, Power Plants and Greenhouses Can Feed Humanity

Co-authored by Ronald Stein, P.E. and Sid Abma

October 9, 2025

Reusing wasted heat exhausted from power plant stacks can support endless greenhouses to help feed the world’s population.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and datacenters are coming and so are the natural gas power plants that will be required to provide continuous uninterruptible electricity to power a lot of these facilities. These power plants today can operate at well over 90% Energy Efficiency.

The natural gas power plant that has produced electricity can further benefit humanity via the waste exhaust that would normally be put into a chimney and vented into the atmosphere, which is a waste of heat and a waste of CO2.

Rather than exhausting hot gases up power plants chimneys, the exhaust can be utilized in greenhouses, typically through a cogeneration system. The recovered heat energy can be used to warm greenhouses, and the CO2 fertilizes the plants, and all contributes to feeding the world’s population.

A Combined Heat and Power (CHP) power plant, also known as cogeneration, is a highly efficient energy system that simultaneously produces both electricity and useful heat from a single fuel source. The process involves using a “prime mover,” such as a gas turbine or engine, to generate electricity and then capturing the waste heat from the prime mover for thermal applications like heating or cooling buildings. This integrated approach significantly increases energy efficiency and reduces fuel consumption compared to generating heat and power separately, leading to lower operating costs and fewer carbon emissions.

The CHP process in the power plant involves treating the exhaust with catalytic converters to reduce any harmful components in the exhaust.

Exhaust Gas Treatment: The exhaust gas is passed through a selective catalytic reduction (SCR)unit and an oxidation catalyst to remove pollutants like nitrogen oxides (NOx) and non-methane hydrocarbons (NMHC).

Within the combusted exhaust is heat energy that was not used to create electricity. The Sidel SRU Flue Gas Condenser was developed in the early 1980’s to recover the waste heat energy from the exhaust of the boilers used to heat these commercial greenhouses.

Today, over 2.5 million square feet of Greenhouses are using this “recovery of wasted heat” technology every day for increasing energy efficiency and to provide cooled CO2. The cooled exhaust, CO2, is being used in commercial greenhouses for CO2 enrichment. Even the created water in the exhaust has a purpose. The Sidel SRU Flue Gas Condenser is being used today in many other applications such as processing plants, hospitals, petrochemical plants, universities, commercial laundries, and State prisons.

To make the most of the elements from future power plants combusted natural gas exhaust, a greenhouse becomes a perfect partner. The SRU recovered heat energy will be piped over and will be used to maintain the perfect growing environment for a multitude of different food crops. The CO2 in the exhaust will be piped over and injected into these growing environments as a fertilizer that will increase fruit and vegetable size and quantity. The condensate water will have nutrients added and then be used to irrigate these crops.

To apply this technology in power plant applications is a natural forward progression. In Utah at the Current Creek power plant this technology is today being applied, heating 30 acres of commercial greenhouses owned by Houweling Nurseries.

All this happens because the owners of the power plant decided to improve their energy efficiency from 50% to 97% by redirecting the combusted exhaust and utilizing the heat energy and the CO2 and the water to better uses.

Utilizing the wasted heat in the exhaust from natural gas power plants can support endless greenhouses to help feed America and the world’s population.

The AI Centers, datacenters, power plants, and greenhouses will be operating for generations, providing good paying community jobs to parents, kids, and grandkids and food for the population.

The technology condensing flue gas heat recovery, provides beneficial use for heat and emissions that would otherwise be released into the atmosphere. This increases plant yield while reducing the economic costs of energy for the greenhouse.

Everyone WINS, with produced electricity and food.

Increased Plant Growth: Elevated CO2 levels in greenhouses accelerate plant growth and increase harvest yields.
Reduced Energy Costs: By recovering waste heat from the exhaust for heating, operating costs for the greenhouses can be significantly reduced.
Sustainable Operation: This closed-loop system reuses byproducts, turning potential pollutants into a valuable resource for plant cultivation.

Greenhouse Benefits:

CO2 Fertilization: The carbon dioxide from the exhaust is naturally used by the plants, a process known as CO2 enrichment, which can significantly boost plant growth and yield.
Heating: The heat from the exhaust provides efficient heating for the greenhouse.

Utilizing the exhausted energy from power plant stacks is a Win-Win situation for all. All this is because the power plants improved their energy efficiency to 97% just by utilizing the exhaust – the heat and CO2 emissions. A good deal for everybody.

The new AI Centers and datacenters are going to create a lot of new jobs.
The new power plants are going to create a lot of local professional jobs.
The new greenhouses will help feed the world’s growing population and create hundreds of new good paying jobs for the local community.

Utilizing waste heat that is normally exhausted from power plant stacks can support endless greenhouses to help feed the world’s population. It also reduces wasting natural gas.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

[BIO: Sid Abma’s company Sidel Systems specialized in the design and installation of warm water heating systems for the commercial greenhouse industry. His passion is to deliver maximum energy efficiency to everything.]

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Ukraine Targets Critical Russian Oil Infrastructure, A Severe Blow to Military and Economy

By Ronald Stein, PE

October 4, 2025

Ukrainian attacks on Russia’s oil refineries and pipelines are sending a strong message to America’s national security team.

Like the biblical story of Goliath vs. David, the underdog Ukraiane is attempting to place a dagger into the heart of Russia’a military and economy, by attacking Russia’s oil refineries and pipelines.

Ukraine has launched a bold and unprecedented aerial counteroffensive against Russia that targets its critical oil infrastructure that is the foundation of its military domination. Ukraine knows that Russia’s military and economy are dependent on their oil refinery infrastructure for transportation fuels and the thousands of other products that are demanded by their militaries and economy.

Ukrainians know that just electricity generated from wind and solar, so-called renewables, are incapable of supporting the products and fuels demanded by the Russian military and economy.

Ukrainians recognize that the “weak link” to Russia’s strength is its oil refinery infrastructure, i.e., targeting these sites for destruction severs the heart of their supply chain or products and fuels to support their economy and the war efforts against the underdog Ukraine.

Russia’s oil infrastructure has taken a hammering after a string of explosions knocked out three major oil and gas pipelines. Ukraine has also stepped up drone strikes on Russia’s refining backbone with at least half a dozen refineries disrupted in recent weeks.

Recently, Ukrainian forces struck the Ilsky oil refinery in Russia’s Krasnodar Krai and the “8-N” oil pipeline control station near the village of Naytopovychi in Russia’s Bryansk region. Both facilities are involved in the supply of fuel and products to Russian troops and their Airforce invading Ukraine, according to Ukraines General Staff.

In recent months, Ukrainian forces have intensified attacks against Russia’s energy infrastructure in an effort to put economic pressure on Moscow and undermine its ability to finance the war.

The “8-N” oil pipeline control station sustained multiple strikes, with a fire erupting near its pumping station and tank farm, according to Ukraine’s military. The strike was conducted overnight on Sept. 7 by Ukraine’s Missile Forces and Artillery and the Unmanned Systems Forces, in coordination with other branches of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

The “8-N” facility is part of the Steel Horse” oil pipeline complex, which has a pumping capacity of 10.5 million tons and is considered strategically important for transporting fuel to Russian forces, according to Ukraine’s General Staff.

Ukraine’s top drone warfare commander, Robert “Madyar” Brovdi, said the “8-N” facility is also strategically important for transporting oil products from Belarusian refineries to Russia, particularly from the Mozyr and Novopolotsk refineries.

In America, the 131 refineries in the country are supporting the demands of the 350 million residents of the USA and all the military bases for transportation fuels and chemicals to make more than 6,000 products used daily.

With no pipelines over the Sierra Mountains, California is an energy island separated from the crude oil supply and the infrastructure of oil refineries within the other 49 States.

Californias 15 refineries support the States’40 million residents demands for fuels and products based on fossil fuels.
The other 116 refineries in America support the other 310 million residents in the country.
All refinery sites can easily reach and exceed 1,000 acres of real estate.

Activities in California may be a prelude to coming attraction for Americans, i.e., activities that are leading to a national security risk for all those living in America.

Over the last several decades, California’s passion to transition away from fossil fuels has overregulated and overly burdened just the SUPPLY of oil production and refining but has not reduced the increasing materialistic DEMANDS of the State for the more than 6,000 products and transportation fuels made from those fossil fuels. Thus, China is savoring the future with their many refineries coming online to meet the DEMANDS of California.
Just last year, in October 2024, Phillips 66 announced that it would close its Wilmington-area refining complex this year, which will further reduce the state’s gasoline, diesel, and aviation fuels production capacity, wiping out more than 8% of the state’s crude oil processing capacity. Losing another 1.3 billion gallons in annual gasoline output will only worsen the state’s supply challenges to meet the demands.
The recent announcement that the Valero Benica Refinery in Northern California will be closing by the end of 2026 was disappointing, but shockingly, a prelude to more closures in the future. The Valero refinery at Benicia represents almost 9% of the state’s crude oil processing capacity to meet the materialistic demands of the state’s residents.

The underdog Ukrainians that are attacking Russia’s oil refineries and pipelines are sending a strong message to America’s national security team as America’s crude oil infrastructure of refineries and pipelines have similar vulnerabilities.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Net-Zero Emission Ideologies Will be Destructive to Future Generations

Co-authored by Ronald Stein and Yoshihiro Muronaka from Japan

September 26, 2025

Conversion of underground hydrocarbon resources of coal, crude oil, and natural gas to meet the supply chain of products demanded by society will be stagnated with net-zero emission ideologies.

The vast resources of underground coal, crude oil, and natural gas are all useless unless refined or processed into the fuels and products that support the lives of 8 billion people. Refineries, coal gasification, and coal liquefaction plants—though emission generators—remain indispensable to modern civilization.

In less than a few centuries, human ingenuity discovered more than 250 groundbreaking refining and processing techniques to convert those useless underground hydrocarbon resources of coal, crude oil, and natural gas into something useful for humanity. Today, more than 6,000 products and transportation fuels are derived from oil—plastics and synthetic rubber, fertilizers for agriculture, detergents, paints, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics and a wide range of fuels such as LPG, gasoline, kerosene, diesel, lubricants, and asphalt for roads. Nearly half of the world’s population depends on synthetic fertilizers made from fossil fuels.

These materials and fuels are the foundation of longer, healthier lives. In 1900, the average life expectancy was 32 years; by 2021, it had more than doubled to 71 years. Today, it exceeds 75 years. Global transportation, commerce, and even space programs are built upon products refined from oil. Every day, more than 50,000 merchant ships, 20,000 commercial aircraft, and 50,000 military aircraft move people and goods around the world, all built with and fueled by derivatives of petroleum.

Yet, while demand for these essential products continues, building the facilities needed to produce them has become increasingly difficult in developed nations. In the United States, no new refinery has been built in decades, and several existing facilities are shutting down. Environmental regulations, political resistance, and “not in my backyard” opposition make it nearly impossible to permit new projects.

Asia, by contrast, is moving forward. As of 2021, there were 88 new refinery facilities in planning or under construction, especially in China and India. Developing nations are expected to host most of the new refining capacity needed by 2030. Without these additions, the supply chain of fuels and products will face severe imbalance, leading to higher costs and shortages for future generations.

Turning Point: Why “Net Zero” Becomes Destructive

The ideology of “net-zero emissions,” while politically appealing, is in practice destructive to future generations. By discouraging the construction of new refineries and processing facilities in developed countries, it undermines the very foundations of the supply chain that delivers essential fuels and products to society. If this trajectory continues, the outcome will not be a cleaner or safer world, but rather one marked by shortages, rising costs, and declining living standards for billions of people.

Do we simply allow such a dark and uncertain future to be passed on to our children and grandchildren? Surely not. To avoid this destructive path, the present generation must embrace a different way of thinking—a paradigm shift. Instead of pursuing the illusion of “zero” at any cost, we must recognize carbon as a resource to be used wisely, cleanly, and efficiently. The outlines of that paradigm are introduced below.

However, this future need not be framed only in terms of decline and scarcity. Advanced technologies already demonstrate that fossil resources can be used far more cleanly and efficiently. Japan’s USC (Ultra-Supercritical) coal-fired power plant in Isogo demonstrates that even coal can be utilized with remarkably low emissions. In addition, Japan has also introduced Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) plants, another advanced technology achieving high efficiency with significantly lower emissions compared to conventional coal power. These high-efficiency, low-emission (HELE) approaches prove that innovation can dramatically reduce the environmental footprint of existing fuels.

If CO₂ is not demonized as the enemy of humanity, then high-cost “green hydrogen” is not the only path—hydrogen derived from fossil fuels can continue to support industry and society. Moreover, CO₂ itself, when combined with hydrogen and catalysts, can be a feedstock for producing useful chemicals and synthetic fuels.

The essential task is not to chase the illusion of “zero” but to cultivate wiser use of what we have: minimizing waste, reusing resources wherever possible, and sustaining ongoing exploration of new technologies. Just as ammonia synthesis has remained fundamentally unchanged for over a century, genuine breakthroughs often come not from incremental tweaks but from paradigm-shifting advances—potentially including next-generation nuclear energy, which could transform both electricity generation and industrial processes.

This 4-billion-year-old planet still holds vast reserves of crude oil and coal. What humanity needs is the courage to use them responsibly, while continuing to innovate for cleaner and more efficient processes. The future will not be secured by banning carbon, but by learning to live with it wisely.

The challenge before us is not to eliminate emissions at any cost, but to build a civilization that thrives by weaving prosperity together with carbon, rather than apart from it.

Notes for Readers:

Our material prosperity and longevity have been built on the ability to refine and process underground hydrocarbons of coal, crude oil, and natural gas, into usable forms. Net-zero ideologies ignore this fundamental truth and, by doing so, risk leaving future generations with scarcity and instability. A wiser path lies in balancing environmental stewardship with technological innovation—embracing efficiency, recycling, and breakthrough solutions while rejecting the illusion that carbon itself is the enemy.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

[BIO: Yoshihiro Muronaka, P.E.Jp is a chemical engineer who currently focuses on evaluating net-zero and decarbonization policies, advocating alternative energy concepts such as “carbon symbiosis,” and promoting balanced international energy cooperation.]

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Transition to Renewables is a Globalist Suicide Pact For the Rest of Us

By Ronald Stein, PE

September 19, 2025

JUST electricity generated from wind and solar, will negatively impact humanity demands for the products based on fossil fuels.

Even though about 80% of the global population of 8 billion people are living on less than $10 per day, the world’s 825 operational oil refineries are processing more than 100 million barrels a day of crude oil to support the thousands of products and transportation fuels demanded by humanity on this planet.

The zero-emission movement has the delusion that JUST electricity generated from wind and solar can replace refineries and the crude oil that they process to support the variety of products and fuels in our materialistic society.

The products and fuels processed from crude oil through refineries that sit on vast acreage sites, are the foundation of longer, healthier lives.

In 1900, the average life expectancy was 32 years; by 2021, it had more than doubled to 71 years. Today, it exceeds 75 years. The growing medical industry of doctors, medications, and hospitals has contributed significantly to the health and well-being of humanity.

The United States consumes more than 20 million barrels a day of that black tar commonly referred to as crude oil through its 131 active oil refineries to support the supply chain of the products and transportation fuels denuded in America.

Today, hospitals and the medical industry are benefiting from the more than 6,000 products and transportation fuels that are derived from the oil processed through refineries—plastics and synthetic rubber, pharmaceuticals, and a wide range of fuels such as LPG, gasoline, kerosene, diesel, lubricants, and asphalt for roads.

Nearly half of the world’s population depends on synthetic fertilizers made from fossil fuels for the supply chain of food to feed the masses.

SPECIAL notes for those net-zero enthusiasts:

The USA refineries, sitting on vast acreage sites that can easily exceed 1,000 acres, only process crude oil to meet the product demands of society. If society did not demand those products, there would be no need for that crude oil to be processed, and thus no need for refineries!
Due to wind and solar renewables inability to make any products, there are 181 new refinery units that are planned or announced, mostly in poorer developing countries, to process crude oil into the products and fuels demanded by those living on this planet, to begin operations worldwide by 2030.

For product dependent hospitals, there isn’t a single, specific number for how many products there are in a hospital because it varies by facility size, specialty, and services offered, but it encompasses a vast range of items from basic supplies like bandages and syringes to complex equipment like MRI machines and ventilators.

Trucks that use transportation fuels from refined crude oil transported more than 70% of the total value of the goods shipped across the country, goods that are also based on refined crude oil.

The types of products include general supplies, diagnostic equipment, surgical instruments, medications, and patient-care items, which are managed through a hospital’s inventory system. Common Product Categories at hospitals stock a wide array of products that are based on the oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil at refineries, including:

Supplies:

Items like bandages, dressings, gloves, syringes, needles, and oxygen tanks are used daily for patient care and hygiene.

Diagnostic & Monitoring Equipment:

Devices such as stethoscopes, cardiac monitors, blood pressure monitors, and ECG machines help assess a patient’s condition.

Treatment & Surgical Equipment:

This category includes ventilators, infusion pumps, surgical instruments, defibrillators, and specialized lighting for operating rooms.

Patient Transport & Comfort:

Gurneys, beds, and other equipment designed for patient movement and comfort are essential in any hospital.

Medications:

Hospitals maintain a stock of various medicines and therapies to treat different illnesses and conditions.

Hospital Size and Capacity:

Larger hospitals generally require more extensive inventories than smaller facilities.

Specialties and Services:

Hospitals specializing in specific areas, such as cardiology or orthopedics, will have a greater quantity of related products.

Technological Advancements:

The adoption of new and complex medical technologies, such as advanced imaging systems, directly adds to the variety and number of products.

Inventory Management:

To manage this wide range of products, hospitals use inventory management systems to track resources, prevent shortages, control costs, and ensure that clinicians have access to necessary supplies.

Another point that renewable enthusiasts do not comprehend is that everything that needs electricity, like cardiac monitors, electrocardiogram machines, infusion pumps, Xray machines, etc. are all made from the processed crude oil that goes through refineries.

For wealthy countries, it’s shocking to comprehend that more than 80% of the 8 billion on this planet are living on less than $10/day, which means that there are more than 6 billion that have yet to join the industrial revolution.

Consequently, to meet the supply chain of products and transportation fuels for those “poor” 6 billion and replacing aging refineries, plans are in place to add 181 new refineries by 2030, reflecting continued demand for refined products that so-called wind and solar renewables are incapable of supporting.

Our material prosperity and longevity have been built on the ability to refine and process underground hydrocarbons of crude oil, coal, and natural gas, into usable forms. Net-zero ideologies ignore this fundamental truth and, by doing so, risk leaving future generations with scarcity and instability.

Hospitals and the entire medical industry, and the health and well-being of billions on this planet, will suffer from the transition to wind turbines and solar panels as those so-called renewables CANNOT support that supply chain of the thousands of products demanded by doctors and hospitals. These renewables only generate occasional electricity under favorable weather conditions but provide no products for humanity.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Africa is Pioneering Nuclear Innovation As it Faces a Dire Electricity Crisis

Co-authored by Ronald Stein, Dr. Robert Jeffrey and Olivia Vaughan

September 12, 2025

To address global electricity demands, Africa is partnering with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to support nuclear energy development in developing countries.

Sub-Saharan Africa faces a dire electricity crisis. Over 600 million people—more than 40% of the continent’s population—lack access to electricity, a figure projected to rise to 657 million by 2030 without intervention.

The global nuclear renaissance is well underway—evidenced by companies like Oklo, which is now included in the Russell 2000 stocks list. The outlook is based on Oklo’s long-term vision, particularly with the Trump Administration’s increased focus on AI Revolution data center development powered by nuclear generated electricity.

The World Bank removing its ban on nuclear presents a vital opportunity for developing economies to position themselves as leaders rather than followers in advanced electricity technology.

Developing nations need not be mere consumers of advanced technology but can be innovators, exporters and active participants in providing clean and reliable electricity to billions on the planet who do not yet have access to electricity or modern amenities.

South Africa was the first country in the world to start commercializing Small Modular Reactor Technology with its Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) program, which was suspended around 2010. Having decades of experience in nuclear technology development, South Africa scientists and engineers are sought after all over the world for their knowledge, practical approach to complex engineering projects, and meticulous attention to detail, i.e., the legacy of the PBMR program.

After the PBMR project was put on indefinite suspension in 2010, the expertise that remained in South Africa continued developing Small Modular Reactor (SMR) technology, the High Temperature Modular Reactor (HTMR), as a home-grown solution—a testament to both the dedication of the technical teams and the commercial viability they saw in the technology. This grouping of pioneering technologists and business strategists in South Africa formed Stratek Global as an umbrella organization to bring advanced technologies and combined power mix solutions to market. Stratek Global has recently secured land on which it plans to build a small modular reactor.

Game-Changing Technology for Developing Economies

SMRs represent a paradigm shift in nuclear electricity design. The South African HTMR is specifically engineered to address the unique challenges facing Africa and other developing regions, like vast land areas and lack of water resources. As an example, the HTMR-100’s turbine condenser design uses radiator cooling and the reactor’s primary circuit is helium cooled—a crucial innovation for a continent where many regions lack access to large inland water bodies.

The smaller size of SMRs thermal and electrical capacity makes the technology an ideal solution for decentralized power generation, addressing one of Africa’s most pressing infrastructure challenges. Instead of requiring thousands of kilometers of new transmission lines—like the 14,000 km needed to unlock South Africa’s Northern Cape solar developments—SMRs can be positioned close to their consumers: mines, smelters, municipalities, and industrial facilities.

• This proximity advantage extends beyond simple logistics. By placing generation near consumption, SMRs can free up existing grid capacity, alleviate congestion issues and provide reliable baseload power. For developing economies struggling with electricity security, this represents a path to industrial growth without the massive upfront infrastructure investments typically required.

The fuel supply chain is the TRISO (Tri-structural ISOtropic) coated particles that are a type of nuclear fuel kernel encased in multiple layers of protective materials. These particles are designed to contain radioactive fission products even under extreme conditions, making them highly robust and suitable for advanced reactor designs. The US Department of Energy calls TRISO particles “the most robust fuel on earth.”

• TRISO fuel required to fuel advanced nuclear technologies have been completely designed and manufactured in South Africa.
• Recent TRISO recycling development includes a Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) project to demonstrate a full-scale TRISO recycling process by 2027.

Additionally, a validation study for Deep Isolation’s Universal Canister System (UCS) with Kairos Power’s TRISO fuel was completed in May 2025, demonstrating the system’s viability for storing, transporting, and disposing of TRISO fuel in deep boreholes and mined repositories.

South African National Nuclear Regulator

South Africa has one of the oldest nuclear regulators in the world. In 1948, the Atomic Energy Act established the Atomic Energy Board (AEB) with the immediate objective of regulating the uranium industry in South Africa. The AEB later became the Atomic Energy Corporation (AEC). South Africa became a founding member state of the International Atomic Energy Agency in 1957.

For operating reactor power plants, The National Nuclear Regulator (NNR) monitors the licensing conditions, operating technical specifications compliance and maintenance & testing regime compliance and achievement to standards set. It also monitors the modifications and improvement programs to ensure continual improvements to international standards.

• Over the years the South African NNR has shown itself to be a most effective organization, and is well equipped to license large reactors, as well as high temperature gas cooled reactors.

Nuclear installations as defined in the National Act, can only be sited, constructed, operated and decommissioned under a Nuclear Installation License. Operations covered include nuclear medicine facilities in hospitals, and mining operations which deal with radioactive substances such as Uranium.

The Koeberg Nuclear Power Station, located 30 km north of Cape Town, South Africa, is the only commercial nuclear power plant in Africa. It features two pressurized water reactors (PWRs) designed by Framatome of France, with construction starting in 1976. Unit 1 was synchronized to the grid on April 4, 1984, and Unit 2 on July 25, 1985.

Economic Transformation Potential

The economic implications of domestic nuclear manufacturing extend far beyond energy security. Dr. Robert Jeffrey has assessed the economic potential of SMRs and the report revealed “phenomenal” export opportunities that will positively impact South Africa’s balance of payments—a benefit that would extend to any developing nation establishing nuclear manufacturing capabilities.

Nuclear construction projects in South Africa could contribute as much as 2% GDP growth over the next decade, before the reactors even come online. Unlike solar farms, which offer limited local skills transfer, nuclear projects require extensive engineering fabrication, high-skilled manufacturing, and sophisticated operational expertise. This creates opportunities for reskilling and upskilling across multiple sectors, from welding and construction to advanced engineering and physics.

SMRs enable multiple applications beyond electricity generation, including seawater desalination, nuclear isotope production for medical applications, and research and development activities. This multi-purpose capability means developing nations can maximize their return on nuclear investments while addressing multiple infrastructure needs simultaneously.

“Jobs need electricity. So do factories, hospitals, schools, and water systems. And as demand surges—with AI and development alike—we must help countries deliver reliable, affordable power. That’s why we’re embracing nuclear energy as part of the solution—and reembracing it as part of the mix the World Bank Group can offer developing countries to achieve their ambitions. Importantly, nuclear delivers baseload power, which is essential to building modern economies,” said World Bank Group President Ajay Banga.

For developing economies, this represents a chance to leapfrog into high-technology manufacturing while building domestic expertise that can serve both local needs and global markets. The indoor manufacturing environment for SMR components means these facilities can be established anywhere with appropriate infrastructure and supply chains.

It is important to note that the developed world continues to enjoy the circa 6000+ products that oil and coal continue to contribute to their daily standard of living. Developing nations need to continue to benefit and optimize their oil and coal-based assets, while building nuclear energy simultaneously to secure the future of generations to come.

A Critical Moment for African Innovation

The choice facing Africa and other developing regions is clear: support indigenous innovation now!

For those with the vision to ensure Africa’s energy independence while contributing to technologies that could power sustainable development across the Global South, SMRs are positioned as a golden opportunity to invest in the future of young and developing nations.

In an era where electricity security and economic development are inextricably linked, backing small and micro nuclear technologies isn’t just good business, it’s an investment in a more equitable and sustainable global electricity future.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

[BIO: Dr Robert Jeffrey is an economist, business manager and energy expert. He has a Master’s degree in economics from Cambridge, a Master’s degree in business management and holds a PhD in Engineering Management. He was on the economic round table advising the South African Reserve Bank
Olivia Vaughan is a business strategist. She has a Bachelor of Commerce in Law and an MBA and operates across key sectors in the circular economy, sustainable systems and the built environment. She is co-founder of a Nuclear innovation company in South Africa, Stratek Global.]

Failures of the Renewables Transition Era are Insults to Taxpayers

By Ronald Stein, PE

September 6, 2025

The worlds’ population depends on insulation, wires, computers, and fertilizers that “renewables” cannot provide.

Natural gas and crude oil are commonly needed fossil fuels to manufacture insulation, wires, and computers used in all methods of generating electricity. This is because components of natural gas and oil are essential feedstocks for creating plastics, which are used for insulation and many computer parts.

Fossil fuels are also required for the vast energy needed throughout the manufacturing process.

Insulation

Many of the polymer plastics used for insulation, like polyethylene (PE), cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE), and polyvinyl chloride (PVC), are made from feedstocks derived from fossil fuels. Natural gas liquids, primarily ethane, are heated in cracker plants to produce ethylene, which is then used to create polyethylene for electrical wires and cables. Crude oil fractions, particularly naphtha, are also used to make ethylene and other petrochemical feedstocks for different types of plastics.

Wind turbines and solar panels only generate electricity, so where is the transition away from fossil fuels?

Wires

While wires themselves are made of copper, a high conductor of electricity, the fossil fuel industry is deeply connected to their production process. Insulation: The manufacturing of the insulating plastics for wires and cables depends on feedstock from natural gas and oil. Energy: The mining, refining, and manufacturing of copper wires is an energy-intensive process that relies heavily on fossil fuels.

Again, wind turbines and solar panels only generate electricity, so where is the transition away from fossil fuels?

Computers

The production of computers and the electronics they contain is one of the most fossil fuel-intensive manufacturing processes per unit of weight. Components: Plastics derived from fossil fuels are used in many parts of a computer, including the casing, circuit boards, and connectors. Energy consumption: The energy required to mine, refine, and manufacture all the different components of a computer comes largely from fossil fuels. One 2004 study found that producing a single desktop computer required ten times its weight in fossil fuels.

Once again, wind turbines and solar panels only generate electricity, so where is the transition away from fossil fuels?

Fertilizers

Conventional nitrogen fertilizers are made using fossil fuels, primarily natural gas, in a process that turns atmospheric nitrogen and fossil-fuel-derived hydrogen into ammonia. This energy-intensive process, called the Haber-Bosch process, is a major contributor to global greenhouse gas emissions. While phosphorus and potassium fertilizers are made from mined minerals, most agricultural production is reliant on synthetic fertilizers derived from fossil fuels.

Multiple sources estimate that approximately half of the world’s food production is dependent on synthetic fertilizers

Without the use of fertilizers, global crop harvests would be reduced by an estimated 30–50%.

Key statistics on global fertilizer dependency

Feeds billions: Synthetic nitrogen fertilizers alone are estimated to feed roughly half of the global population. The Haber-Bosch process, which creates these fertilizers, is believed to have enabled the lives of at least 3 to 3.5 billion people today.
Yield increases: Studies on crop production have attributed anywhere from 30% to over 60% of crop yield increases to synthetic fertilizer inputs, with some analyses suggesting even higher dependency in tropical climates.
Specific crops: The dependency varies by crop and region. In some countries, a disproportionate amount of fertilizer is used for a single crop, such as maize in the United States, soybeans in Brazil, or palm oil in Malaysia.
Different nutrients: While nitrogen (N) is the most widely discussed nutrient for food production, fertilizers containing phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) are also critical. Over half of the phosphorus fertilizer used is from nonrenewable sources.

Why is there such a high dependency on fertilizers?

Population growth: The global population has surged from 1.65 billion in 1900 to over 8 billion today. This growth has been supported by the dramatic increase in food production made possible by synthetic fertilizers.
Increased yields: Fertilizers provide the essential macronutrients that plants need to grow. Without them, it would be impossible to achieve the high crop yields necessary to sustain the world’s population on the existing amount of arable land.
Land conservation: By intensifying agriculture on existing farmland, fertilizers reduce the need to convert more natural ecosystems into farms.
Historical trends: Global fertilizer consumption has grown substantially over the last several decades, from 46.3 million metric tons in 1965 to 187.92 million metric tons in 2022. This growth reflects a widespread reliance on modern agricultural methods.

Net-zero ideologies ignore this fundamental truth that wind turbines and solar panels only generate electricity and cannot support the supply chain of products demanded by humanity and, by doing so, risk leaving future generations with scarcity and instability.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Americans’ Quality of Life Jeopardized Due to Reduction of Refineries

By Ronald Stein, P.E.

August 29, 2025

Political and environmental challenges will determine who wants a “dirty” emissions generating refinery in “their” backyards to help meet the product and fuel demands of society.

Most folks may not understand that the underground black tar commonly referred to crude oil is useless, unless refined into something usable. Fortunately, in less than a few centuries, mankind’s ingenuity led to 250 groundbreaking hydrocarbon processing and refining techniques being discovered. The impact of that ingenuity continues today, benefiting the 8 billion people living on Earth with more than 6,000 products and transportation fuels that are derived from oil.

Across the world, people are living longer. In 1900, the average life expectancy of a newborn was 32 years. By 2021 this had more than doubled to 71 years. Today, it’s better than 75 years.

Today, we have more than 50,000 merchant ships, more than 20,000 commercial aircraft and more than 50,000 military aircraft that are built with the products made from oil. The transportation fuels to move the heavy-weight and long-range needs of jets moving people and products, and the merchant ships for global trade flows, and the military and space programs, are also dependent on what can be manufactured from crude oil.

In addition to the large oil reserves, the world has an abundance of coal that can somewhat replace crude oil through coal gasification and coal liquefaction plants, but they too have emission challenges.

We know that raw crude oil is useless unless it can be refined into derivatives that are the basis of more than 6,000 products, and for various transportation fuels.
Technology is always evolving, like fracking, but at current crude oil usage of about 82 million barrels a day, those “known” reservices of crude oil may run out in the next 100 years or more.
Refineries in America are getting old, and several are starting to shut down.
It’s almost impossible to get a new refinery sited, permitted and built in America.
Coal gasification and coal liquefaction plants may face the same or even great challenges for new refineries – getting them sited, permitted, and built.

However, the expansion plans for refineries, coal gasification, and coal liquefaction plants face challenges, particularly with growing environmental concerns and policy shifts towards reducing emissions and fossil fuel consumption, according to the Institute for Energy Research.

In recent decades, no new refineries have been built in America. Building these projects is not only expensive but also fraught with environmental and political opposition, particularly with rising concerns over climate change and the transition to greener energy. These projects can experience delays due to various factors, including financing, logistics, and regulatory hurdles.

Concerns for new refineries, coal gasification, and coal liquefaction plants for construction raise significant political and environmental concerns, including:

Air pollution: Refining processes release harmful pollutants such as particulate matter (PM), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and sulfur dioxide (SO2), contributing to smog, acid rain, and respiratory illnesses.
Water pollution: Refineries generate vast amounts of wastewater containing oil, grease, and toxic chemicals, posing risks to aquatic ecosystems and drinking water sources if not properly treated.
Greenhouse gas emissions: The combustion of fossil fuels in refineries contributes significantly to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, including carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4), exacerbating climate change.
Land degradation and hazardous waste: Refinery operations can lead to soil contamination from spills and leaks, land disturbance during construction, and the generation of hazardous waste.
Health impacts on communities: Studies show that communities living near refineries, often disadvantaged and minority populations, face higher risks of developing various health issues, including asthma, cancers, and cardiovascular diseases.

To support the supply chain of all those products and fuels demanded by society, there are:

currently 825 active oil refineries in the world,
plans for 181 additional refineries by 2030, mostly in developing countries,
a few operating coal gasification projects,
no coal liquefaction plants in America

Despite tepid demand growth projections, 4.2 mb/d of new refining capacity is expected globally by 2030 (mostly located in developing countries), partly offset by 1.6 mb/d of closures (mostly older refineries located in the wealthier developed countries).

California is set to lose 17% of its oil refinery capacity over the next 12 months because of two planned refinery closures, Phillips in Southern CA in 2025 and Valero in Northern CA in 2026. If realized, the closure of these facilities is likely to contribute to increases in fuel price volatility on the West Coast, and challenges to meet the demand of California’s 9 international airports and 41 military airports for 13 million gallons of aviation fuel daily from in-state refineries.

It’s ironic that the 650 acres of the Phillips Refinery in Wilmington, CA that will be closing at the end of 2025 will be replaced with retail and warehouses all built and supported with the products made by refined crude oil, from other refineries that are not-in-MY-backyard.

Asia is the region with the greatest number of future petroleum refineries. As of 2021, there were 88 new refinery facilities in planning or under construction in Asia for manufactured gasoline, diesel, and aviation fuels used by every transportation infrastructure, and the military, as well as the manufactured oil derivatives that are the basis of most products being used by mankind.

These upcoming refinery projects are a combination of new construction primarily in developing countries, and expansions of existing facilities primarily in wealthier developed countries. The Asia-Pacific region, especially China and India, is expected to see a significant portion of these new refining additions, followed by the Middle East and Africa.

In response to these concerns, the refining industry is adopting various technologies and practices to reduce pollution, including flare gas recovery systems, VOC control technologies, advanced wastewater treatment systems, and energy-efficient combustion systems. Stricter environmental regulations and the shift towards cleaner energy sources are also impacting the future of the refining industry, potentially leading to refinery closures in the coming decades.

This 4-billion-year-old Planet has vast resources of crude oil and coal in the ground that need to be refined or processed to meet the supply chain of products demanded by society. However, the more advanced developed economies are the LEAST likely to allow any “dirty” emissions generating plants to be sited, permitted, or built in THEIR BACKYARDS, inclusive of refineries, coal gasification and coal liquefaction plants to help meet the materialistic product and fuel demands of humanity!

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Wind Turbines and Solar Panels ONLY Generate Electricity

Co-authored by Ronald Stein and Yoshihiro Muronaka

August 22, 2025

Wind turbines and solar panels are incapable of making any of the products or transportation fuels demanded by the 8 billion on this planet.

It is both timely and impactful to deepen public and governmental policymakers’ understanding of electricity, including the essential role of fossil fuels that are driving global development with the products and transportation fuels that are dependent on those same fossil fuels.

In less than a few centuries, 250 groundbreaking hydrocarbon processing and refining techniques were discovered. Their impact continues today, benefiting the 8 billion people living on Earth.

Today, over 6,000 products derived from petroleum enrich our lives. They have reduced infant mortality, doubled global life expectancy from around 40 to over 80 years, and made it possible to travel anywhere in the world by plane, train, ship, or car—drastically reducing weather-related deaths to nearly zero. These were all unimaginable in societies before 1800.

If we go back 200 years to the 1800s, we find a decarbonized society, i.e., a very different era and a society without products, transportation fuels, and electricity, it was: fossil-fuel products weren’t widespread, thus lifestyles were less prosperous, health conditions were precarious, and life longevity was short.

A renewed shift toward decarbonization and zero-emission lifestyles, severely restricts the use of fossil fuels, like coal and oil, could bring us back to a world of more than 200 years ago. That might mean billions suffering again from disease, malnutrition, and weather-related fatalities.

Moving toward decarbonization risks depriving, or delaying access to, the standards of living and products that wealthy, healthy nations take for granted. Today, around 700 million people, which is roughly 9% of humanity, live below the international poverty line. In other words, halting fossil fuel production and use would reverse many centuries of progress.

Over the last 200 years, after the discovery of the products and transportation fuels that could be manufactured out of crude oil, the world populated from 1 to 8 billion. It was the more than 6,000 “products” from oil that supported the tremendous growth in population.

Today, we have more than 1.4 billion cars and trucks, 50,000 merchant ships, 20,000 commercial aircraft, and 50,000 military aircraft that use the fuels manufactured from crude oil. The fuels to move the heavy-weight and long-range needs of jets moving people and products, and the merchant ships for global trade flows, and the military and space programs, are also dependent on what can be manufactured from crude oil.

Today, we’re a materialistic society. Wind and solar cannot make EV’s, or any of the products or fuels that get made from fossil fuels.

• Wind turbines and solar panels can ONLY generate ELECTRICITY.
• All the products and transportation fuels demanded by society, all the infrastructures, and the economy are made from fossil fuels.

Today, “Net Zero” policymakers setting “green” policies are oblivious to the reality that so-called “renewables”, ONLY generate electricity but CANNOT make anything. In addition, everything that NEEDS Electricity, like iPhones and computers, are made with petrochemicals manufactured from crude oil, coal, or natural gas.

• Electricity came AFTER oil, as ALL electrical generation methods from hydro, coal, natural gas, nuclear, wind, and solar are ALL built with the products, components, and equipment that are made from oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil.
• All the transportation fuels for the more than 1,400,000,000 cars and trucks in the world, the 50,000 merchant ships, the 20,000 commercial aircraft, and the 50,000 military aircraft are made from raw crude oil.
• All 60 million EV’s currently in the world today are also built with the products, components, and equipment that are made from the oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil.
• Getting rid of crude oil would eliminate electricity, and the more than 6,000 products in demand by hospitals, airports, communications, and the 8 billion on this planet, and would paralyze virtually all transportation by cars, trucks, EVs, ships, and aircraft!

We’ve had more than 200 years to “clone” the SUPPLY of oil production and oil refining to support the supply chain of products and transportation fuels DEMANDED by society and have been unsuccessful. The greatest threat to humanity is running out of crude oil before we have an alternative that can meet the supply chain of all the products and transportation fuels that are derived from oil.

Just remember that wind turbines and solar panels are incapable of making any of the products or transportation fuels demanded by the 8 billion on this planet. Thus, it is essential to have balanced discussions about products, electricity, and transportation fuels to enhance the understanding of energy systems with public and governmental policymakers through tangible examples and to develop materials that bridge both the macro and technical viewpoints.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

[BIO: Yoshihiro Muronaka, P.E.Jp is a chemical engineer who currently focuses on evaluating net-zero and decarbonization policies, advocating alternative energy concepts such as “carbon symbiosis,” and promoting balanced international energy cooperation.]

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Governor Newsom Has no Solutions How to Run California’s Economy Without Crude Oil

By Ronald Stein, PE

August 15, 2025

Gavin Newsom has constantly attacked the supply and manufacturing of crude oil, that is the basis of every product that’s demanded by society.

California Governor Newsom remains oblivious to economies’ demands for a supply chain of the products and transportation fuels currently derived from fossil fuels. He seems unaware that so-called renewables like wind and solar CANNOT make any products or fuels for society, as they can ONLY generate electricity under favorable weather conditions.

Supply chain of PRODUCTS and FUELS that wind and solar CANNOT support

Today, we’re a materialistic society. Wind and solar CANNOT make EV’s, or any of the products or fuels that get made from fossil fuels that support:

Hospitals
Airports
Militaries
Medical equipment
Telecommunications
Communications systems
Space programs
Appliances
Electronics
Sanitation systems
Heating and ventilating
Transportation – vehicles, rail, ocean, and air
Construction – roads and buildings
Nearly Half the World’s Population Relies on Synthetic Fertilizers Made from Fossil Fuels

More importantly, the greatest threat to humanity is running out of crude oil, and the refineries that process that that raw black tar, before we have an alternative to meet the supply chain of all the products and transportation fuels that are derived from oil that are supporting the 8 billion on this planet.

The rapid cessation of fossil fuel use, if followed through before we have an alternative replacement for the supply chain of products and fuels being demanded by society, is not just a policy misstep; it’s a death sentence for half the planet.

California transportation FUEL DEMANDS that wind and solar CANNOT support

California transportation fuel demands for airports, ships, cars, and trucks have staggering numbers from the in-state refineries:

Jet fuel: With all its 145 airports, including 9 international airports and 41 military airports, the demand is 13 million gallons of aviation fuel daily. Several of those airports have direct pipelines to local refineries. In 2019, California consumed 16.7% of the national total of jet fuel, making it the largest consumer of jet fuel in America.
Gasoline: For its 30 million vehicles, California is the second-largest consumer of motor gasoline among the 50 states, consuming 42 million gallons a day of gasoline, just behind Texas.
Diesel: Diesel fuel is the second largest transportation fuel used in California, consuming 10 million gallons a day of diesel to support the state’s trucking of products from 3 of the busiest shipping ports in America
Arizona and Nevada: California refineries supply 45% of Arizona’s and 88% of Nevada’s transportation fuel demands for their airports, cars, and trucks, so any disruption in California impacts all three states.

California transportation FUEL TAXES that wind and solar CANNOT support

California has almost 400,000 miles of roadways used by the State’s 30 million vehicles. Those roadways are heavily dependent on road taxes from fuels that contribute more than $8.8 billion annually, for planning, constructing, and maintaining California’s publicly funded roadways. The same gas tax revenues also fund many environmental programs and the high-speed rail project. That $8.8 billion revenue source from fuel taxes will diminish in the years ahead as heavier EVs are being mandated in California to replace the lighter internal combustion engine vehicles.

California has obviously not learned much in the 50 years since the Oil Embargo of 1973, as the following persist:

California, the 4^th largest economy in the world, was virtually independent of foreign oil imports in 1973, but due to its relentless regulations to reduce in-state oil production the State now imports more than 70% of its crude oil demand to run the States’ 9 International airports, 41 Military airports, and 3 of the largest shipping ports in America.

Economically, refiners face a shrinking return on investment. With the California 2035 ban on new internal combustion vehicles looming and EV adoption slowly rising, in-state refiners have little long-term incentive to invest in expanding production. In fact, many are choosing to exit the market or repurpose facilities for renewable fuels rather than double down on gasoline. As a result, the remaining refiners are unlikely or unable to ramp up production to backfill lost supply, leaving California more reliant on imported, California-compliant gasoline from out-of-state or foreign sources, which is slower and more expensive to procure.

Just last year, in October 2024, Phillips 66 announced that it would close its Wilmington-area refining complex this year, which will further reduce the state’s gasoline, diesel, and aviation fuels production capacity, wiping out more than 8% of the state’s crude oil processing capacity. Losing another 1.3 billion gallons in annual gasoline output will only worsen the state’s supply challenges to meet the demands.

The recent announcement that the Valero Benica Refinery in Northern California will be closing by the end of 2026 was disappointing, but shockingly, a prelude to more closures in the future. The Valero refinery at Benicia represents almost 9% of the state’s crude oil processing capacity to meet the materialistic demands of the state’s residents.

Over the last several decades, California’s passion to transition away from fossil fuels has overregulated and overly burdened just the SUPPLY of oil production and refining but has not reduced the increasing materialistic DEMANDS of the State for the more than 6,000 products and transportation fuels made from those fossil fuels. Thus, China is savoring the future with their many refineries coming online to meet the DEMANDS of California.

“Net Zero” policymakers setting “green” policies are oblivious to the reality that so-called “renewables”, ONLY generate electricity but CANNOT make anything. In addition, everything that NEEDS electricity, like iPhones and computers, are made with petrochemicals manufactured from crude oil, coal, or natural gas.

Under Gavin Newsom’s lack of energy literacy leadership, the number of Californians fleeing the once-Golden State has been accelerating.

California Governor Newsom remains unaware that electricity came AFTER oil, as ALL electrical generation methods from hydro, coal, natural gas, nuclear, wind, and solar are ALL built with the products, components, and equipment that are made from the oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil. Without Crude Oil there can be no Electricity!

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Nuclear Power in a Free Enterprise Environment is the Pathway to Abundant Low-Cost Electricity

By Ronald Stein, Oliver Hemmers, and Steve Curtis

August 7, 2025

Getting Government, mandates, and subsidies out-of-the-way will benefit humanity and allow creative free enterprise to succeed in delivering electricity to the world.

The rising cost of electricity is primarily due to the entrenched nature of utility monopolies, which restrict consumer choice and inhibit market competition. As the electricity demand steadily increases—driven by factors such as the proliferation of electric vehicles, population growth, and the rapid expansion of energy-intensive data and AI centers—electricity supply remains limited by outdated regulatory frameworks and market models.

Protected from competition, utilities have a minimal incentive to innovate or control prices. Increased expenditures associated with integrating unreliable, intermittent, and low-energy-density renewable energy sources, volatility in fossil fuel markets, and heightened regulatory requirements are passed on to consumers. Without the discipline imposed by competition, there is little to prevent continual price increases; thus, as demand surpasses supply, the fundamental principles of economics mandate that costs will continue to escalate for all who rely on the electrical grid, which is everyone.

Historically, nuclear power systems have been approximately 97% identical to coal power plants, with the primary difference being the heat source, which is the energy required to convert water into steam to power the turbines. Coal mining operations faced threats to their monopolies when the heat from a small percentage of naturally occurring radioactive decay of uranium (U-235) proved to be millions of times more potent than the heat generated by burning coal. The uranium (U235) that occurs naturally as a trace material in the coal contains more energy than the coal itself. The coal industry, instead of viewing nuclear power as a rival, should have continued its early practice of promoting nuclear power as its “next generation” power. We are trying to give the fossil fuel industry a good reason to return to its previous policy of embracing nuclear power.

The recent craze for clean energy did not revisit the powerful clean energy solution of nuclear power but came up with the absolute worst solutions possible – wind and solar power. These are the most expensive, least reliable, and environmentally disastrous “solutions” to electricity production that anybody could have cooked up. Trying to integrate these boondoggles into the various national grids is very expensive and causes blackouts in other countries.

The strange world of nuclear power centers on the realization that nature has provided us with a unique solution to improve our quality of life, yet our society is amassing as many obstacles as possible to its fruition. Commercial nuclear power has a 70-year track record of enormous success to be proud of.

The benefits of nuclear energy have been obscured by the massive amount of money spent to create a fog of doubt in the public’s perception of these benefits. Techniques such as this used to be called “antitrust” or “unfair competition”, but these days they seem to be “business as usual”.

This “business as usual” is especially troubling because the very Government we trust to lookout for our best interests is complicit in creating the fog that is clouding its progress. We can ponder why this is the case all we want, but we need to focus on how to reverse the damage caused over the last 40 years of the marketing of electricity to the public.

The marketing of electricity is now conducted through business entities called “utilities,” and current government thinking has led us to believe that electricity can only be marketed as a monopoly.

Therefore, we are limited to purchasing our electricity from only one company. This is further complicated by the fact that there is no other commodity that directly affects our quality of life than electric energy. If you possess this commodity, you are part of the top tier of wealthy societies. If you do not, you are relegated to third-world status with a very meager quality of life. The very thing that nature has given us to lift our lives out of poverty is subjected to government-supported obstacles designed to deny us the maximum benefit of this bounty purposely.

Even proponents of nuclear power seem focused on relegating this industry to failure. No product is marketed by describing dangers that could happen, even if those dangers have a proven history of actual safety. No person has ever been hurt from the normal operations of nuclear power production in almost 70 years of actual history. The Chernobyl incident did not happen under “normal operations”. Nobody was hurt because of the failures of either Three Mile Island or Fukushima. No other industry can even come close to this safety record. We accept the risk of driving cars when more than 40,000 people each year die from such behavior. We accept the risk of flying commercial airlines that kill an average of more than 500 people per year. The safety burden on these industries is almost non-existent compared to the massive burden imposed on the nuclear power industry by government involvement in this business.

It is difficult to justify the stringent restrictions and prohibitive progress imposed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, especially when their claim of preventing safety failures contradicts the fact that the nuclear industry has been the safest on the planet over the last 70 years.

However, the most significant burden on the nuclear power industry is the massive weight of utility monopolies. Customers must purchase power from a single source, regardless of the cost. If the enormous costs imposed by “renewables” crop up on your bill, the price will rise. If the cost of coal and natural gas increases, you have no alternative but to pay the price.

While the demand for additional electricity over the past 20 years has been in the range of a few percent per year, AI and data centers will need 10% or more per year alone for their power-hungry infrastructure. You will pay the price for this mistake as demand for electric power increases. The immutable rule for increasing demand while supply remains constant is that costs rise. With no alternative supply, they will continue to rise. Why would a monopoly want this to change? It is a guaranteed profit, all on the backs of hapless ratepayers.

Yes, you are not “customers”. You are “ratepayers”. The companies building data centers have stated that they will bid costs as high as necessary to get their power. Exceeding a dollar per kWh still realized massive profits for these centers, and some have stated they will be profitable at three dollars per kWh ($3 per kWh, or at least 15 times the current price). So, who will get electricity? Consumers who think electricity is expensive at $0.20 per kWh, or those willing to pay $3.00 per kWh.

No electric power system, except for nuclear, is scalable enough to meet this growing demand. Furthermore, the new types of nuclear power plants can recycle the slightly used nuclear fuel from the existing fleet of nuclear power plants that has accumulated over the past five decades, offering almost unlimited electricity at pennies per kWh.

The roadblocks ahead are the monopolies of utilities, which have a high resistance to change, as they always have.

Yet, both AT&T and Standard Oil were “de-monopolized” by Federal mandate. Yet, arguably, the most essential commodity to citizens seems to be mandated to remain a monopoly by the same government (or, maybe not the same?). Electricity can be easily transmitted directly to customers through the electric grid, just like phone service is transmitted over radio networks. In fact, with the advent of modern Generation IV reactors, they can supply direct power without a grid. All we need to do is get the Government monkey off our back and relegate them to their original purpose of looking out for us all through creating and enforcing laws that mandate fair play in a free enterprise world.

Free enterprise in the electric power sector will unleash innovation and competition, resulting in the lowest electricity rates. All citizens will benefit from that, but, as always, you must demand it.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Electricity Generated From Wind and Solar Cannot Replace Fossil Fuels!

Co-authored by Ronald Stein and Yoshihiro Muronaka

August 2, 2025

Introduction: The Renewable Energy Illusion

Wind turbines and solar panels are incapable of making any of the products or transportation fuels demanded by the 8 billion on this planet.

Around the world, there is a growing belief that renewable electricity, especially that generated by wind and solar—can lead us to a fully decarbonized future. While this vision is noble and reflects the urgent desire to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, it often overlooks the significant limitations of these sources. Wind and solar are inherently intermittent and weather-dependent, and they lack the consistency needed to power a complex, industrialized world over long periods and in all conditions.

Modern society depends on continuous, reliable electricity not only for lighting and appliances but also for transportation, industrial production, communication, and the maintenance of public health systems. From the cooling of vaccines and surgical procedures to the operation of telecommunications networks, the constant availability of power is essential. Wind and solar simply cannot fulfill all these roles without substantial backup from other electricity generating sources, primarily coal, natural gas, or nuclear power. Even in regions rich in wind or solar potential, seasonal variations and extended calm or cloudy periods create substantial supply vulnerabilities.

Electricity, while vital, is only one component of our vast energy ecosystem that includes transportation fuels, products, and electricity. Fossil fuels do far more than power homes—they are the foundational input for countless products and infrastructure systems. From the fuels that power our cars and planes to the plastics used in hospitals and data centers, hydrocarbons remain deeply embedded in the global economy. Industrial processes, such as steel production, cement manufacturing, and petrochemical refining, all rely on fossil fuels not only for electricity but also as feedstocks of the products made from oil derivatives manufactured from raw crude oil. Ignoring this complexity in favor of simplistic narratives undermines our ability to build practical, balanced electricity strategies for the future. It also risks creating policies that disrupt critical sectors, jeopardize economic growth, and overlook the needs of poorer developing regions still struggling with access to electricity.

What Fossil Fuels Provide

Fossil fuels are the backbone of modern life. Over 6,000 essential products—from medical tools and electronics to fertilizers and plastics—are derived from petroleum. These include everyday items such as clothing, packaging, synthetic rubber, detergents, cosmetics, and even medications. Without fossil fuels, modern healthcare, sanitation, and transportation systems would cease to function effectively.

Global transportation, including over a billion vehicles and tens of thousands of aircraft and ships, relies on oil-based transportation fuels made from crude oil. These fuels are energy-dense, portable, and economically efficient—qualities that current renewable technologies cannot match. Replacing them with alternatives would require new materials not yet available in the required volumes.

Hospitals, agriculture, and digital infrastructure also depend on fossil fuel-based products and electricity. Operating rooms require sterile plastic instruments. Farms rely on diesel-powered machinery and nitrogen-based fertilizers derived from natural gas. Data centers, which power the digital economy, require continuous energy and equipment built with fossil-fuel-derived components. These uses cannot be easily or economically replaced, especially in developing regions still building foundational infrastructure.

Limits of Wind and Solar

Wind and solar depend on weather and daylight. They can’t produce base-load power consistently and need fossil fuel or nuclear generated electricity as backup. Even when the sun shines and the wind blows, electricity storage becomes essential for nighttime or cloudy days and still air. Unfortunately, large-scale battery systems are expensive, environmentally challenging to produce, and limited in capacity.

The infrastructure supporting wind and solar—turbines, panels, batteries—relies on mining, manufacturing, and transport powered by oil and gas. Materials such as rare earth elements, copper, steel, and aluminum must be extracted, refined, and delivered—tasks currently dependent on the products and transportation fuels from fossil fuels. The environmental footprint of this entire supply chain must be factored into any honest assessment of renewables.

Electric vehicles may reduce emissions at the tailpipe but still rely on fossil fuels for manufacturing, electricity, and maintenance. Battery production is electricity-intensive and involves supply chains often associated with poor labor practices and ecological disruption. Battery storage remains costly and inadequate for large-scale needs, especially in cold climates or during extended periods of low renewable output. Meanwhile, the electricity used to charge EVs is often still generated by fossil fuels.

The Risk of Rushed Net Zero Goals

Eliminating fossil fuels without practical alternatives risks societal regression. Billions depend on hydrocarbons for basic development. In many parts of the world, fossil fuels are still the most accessible and affordable source of electricity for cooking, heating, and transportation. Removing that access too quickly could worsen poverty and health outcomes.

Europe’s electricity crises show the dangers of overdependence on renewables and geopolitical instability. Several countries that phased out fossil fuels prematurely had to restart coal-fired power plants to avoid blackouts. The global scramble for LNG further demonstrates the fragility of current energy systems and the unintended consequences of rapid decarbonization.

Investment policies that shun fossil fuels often cause underinvestment in electricity infrastructure, raising the risk of shortages and economic instability. Divestment campaigns may satisfy political goals but rarely consider technical feasibility. A more balanced approach is needed—one that combines emissions reduction with electricity security and technological realism.

Why Energy Literacy Matters

Understanding how energy systems work is key to smart decisions. Fossil fuels are not just fuels—they’re essential inputs for modern economies. Renewables alone can’t replace them. Without public awareness of these realities, policies risk being shaped by ideology rather than practicality.

True sustainability requires thoughtful transitions: cleaner fossil fuel tech, responsible renewable growth, and potentially nuclear electricity. Innovations such as carbon capture, hydrogen fuels, and advanced geothermal could play roles. But no single solution can carry the burden alone—diversity and adaptability are essential.

Educated citizens are better equipped to evaluate trade-offs and support resilient electricity policy. Schools, media, and civic groups should promote energy literacy to enable informed dialogue. Public understanding is the foundation of democratic accountability in electricity decisions.

Conclusion

Wind and solar are valuable but not sufficient. Removing fossil fuels without alternatives would undo progress. A pragmatic, informed approach is vital for a stable and equitable electrical future.

Let’s foster energy literacy at all levels of society, i.e., the difference between transportation fuels, products, and electricity, it’s essential for making choices that safeguard both prosperity and the planet.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Small Modular Reactors: A Game-Changer for Africa & the World

Co-authored by Ronald Stein, Dr. Robert Jeffrey and Olivia Vaughan

July 22, 2025

Africa deserves the same opportunity for development that the West took for granted, unburdened by a green agenda that keeps the continent energy-poor and dependent.

For South Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa where electricity deficits stifle growth, Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) offer a promising solution.

With the Trump Administration poised to reshape global electricity policy, the U.S. has a unique opportunity to lead the West in supporting Africa’s electricity-driven progress through SMRs. The Trump administration should lead Western nations in abandoning hypocritical restrictions and thus become a collaborator in advancing African electricity security

The Electricity Crisis in Sub-Saharan Africa

Sub-Saharan Africa faces a dire electricity crisis. Over 600 million people—more than 40% of the continent’s population—lack access to electricity, a figure projected to rise to 657 million by 2030 without intervention. This deficit hampers industrialization, healthcare, and education, trapping millions in poverty. South Africa, with its Koeberg Nuclear Power Station is the only country in Africa with operational nuclear power, yet even here, electricity reliability remains a challenge.

The West has built its prosperity on an abundant supply chain of products and transportation fuels made from fossil fuels, and abundant electricity. Now, through the Marshall Plan, it pressures Africa to adopt renewable-heavy policies that prioritizes climate goals over developmental reality. Solar and wind can only generate intermittent electricity and is costly in regions with limited grid infrastructure, unable to deliver the consistent baseload power required for industrial growth.

Forcing Africa into a renewable-only path risks perpetuating electricity poverty, a form of hypocrisy that is bullying the world’s poor.

Small Modular Reactors: A Game-Changer for Africa

Enter Small Modular Reactors, a technology ideally suited to address Africa’s electricity challenges. Unlike traditional large-scale nuclear plants, which require significant upfront costs and extensive water for cooling, SMRs are compact, scalable, and designed for flexibility. With outputs typically ranging from 10 to 300 MW, SMRs can power small towns, mining operations, or urban centers, making them perfect for Africa’s diverse and often remote landscapes.

South Africa has emerged as a global leader in SMR development, particularly through its Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) and its successor, the HTMR-100. Initiated in the 1990s, the PBMR uses helium gas for cooling, eliminating the need for large water bodies—a critical advantage in arid regions. The HTMR-100, developed privately after the PBMR project stalled in 2010 due to financial constraints, is designed for rapid deployment and affordability, with off-the-shelf components reducing costs. A single unit can power a large town or mining complex, and its fuel can be safely stockpiled for years, ensuring reliability even in remote areas.

Recent developments signal a revival. South Africa’s Energy Minister has committed to a 2,500 MW nuclear build program, explicitly endorsing SMRs.

The Nuclear Renaissance and U.S. Leadership

The global resurgence of nuclear power, spurred by the Trump Administration’s recent executive orders, aligns with Africa’s needs. By addressing regulatory, supply, and siting challenges, these orders have ignited a nuclear stock rally, with companies like Nano Nuclear, Oklo, and NuScale leading the charge. As U.S. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum declared, “Mark this day on your calendar. This is going to turn the clock back on over 50 years of overregulation.” Whether this marks a true nuclear renaissance or a speculative bubble, the market’s optimism backed by bipartisan support, signals a shift toward nuclear power as a reliable, clean electricity source.

For Africa, Generation IV SMRs offer a transformative opportunity. Their modular design allows factory-based construction and on-site assembly, reducing costs and deployment times compared to traditional reactors. In countries with nuclear experience like South Africa, SMRs could be deployed in as little as about 5 years. Technologies like the HTMR-100, with passive safety features, enhance safety and minimize risks, addressing concerns about radiation and proliferation.

The Role of the Trump Administration

The Trump Administration’s pro-nuclear stance presents a golden opportunity. By investing in SMR projects, the U.S. can support Africa’s electricity goals while fostering economic partnerships. It’s time to reject Western bullying and prioritize Africa’s development, countering its reliance on foreign powers like Russia and China, which dominate nuclear exports to Africa.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) relies on the Linear No-Threshold (LNT) model, established in the 1950s, to regulate radiation exposure, assuming all doses linearly increase cancer risk. However, this model is criticized for ignoring biological evidence of DNA repair, apoptosis, and adaptive responses that mitigate low-dose radiation effects, potentially overestimating harm from nuclear power plant releases by orders of magnitude.

Studies, including those from high-background radiation areas and animal models, suggest low doses may stimulate protective responses (hormesis). The LNT model’s adoption, influenced by historical anti-nuclear biases rather than low-dose data, drives overly conservative regulations, inflating costs and public fear.

The NRC should urgently review LNT against threshold or hormesis models, integrating modern biological and epidemiological evidence, to ensure regulations reflect current science and balance safety with practicality.

Seizing the Moment

Africa’s right to develop is undeniable, and SMRs are a critical tool to achieve it. South Africa’s leadership in SMR technology, coupled with growing interest across Sub-Saharan Africa, signals a path to electricity security and economic growth. The Trump Administration can lead the West in supporting this vision, dismantling restrictive green mandates and investing in Africa’s nuclear future. Denying Africa access to electricity is not justice—it’s a betrayal. By championing SMRs, the U.S. can help power Africa’s rise, ensuring prosperity for the continent and stability for the world. The time to act is now.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

California Continues to Devastate Its Economy for a Net-Zero Dream World

Co-authored by Ronald Stein, P.E. and Michael Mische

July 18, 2025

California’s passion to achieve net-zero emissions at the expense of its citizens has devastated its economy.

California’s contribution to global emissions, as the 4^th largest economy in the world, is a small percentage, roughly 0.75%. To put that into perspective, if the “big earthquake” hit California, and the entire state fell into the Pacific Ocean, there would be less than a 1% reduction in Worldwide emissions.

As reported by Californians for Energy Independence, California’s Economy is supported by Oil and Gas, so let’s look at the state’s demands for the products and transportation fuels that so-called renewables like wind and solar CANNOT make for society, as they can ONLY generate electricity under favorable weather conditions.

The West Coast gasoline, diesel, and aviation fuels market is isolated from other supply and demand centers, as California is an energy island, separated from the States East of the Sierra Mountains. The Sierra Mountains are a natural barrier that prevents the state from pipeline access to any of the excess oil from fracking. As such, the West Coast is susceptible to unexpected outages of West Coast refineries, as it is unable to backfill an unexpected loss in supply by quickly supplying additional products from outside the region.

Fuel Demands

California transportation fuel demands for airports, ships, cars, and trucks have staggering numbers from the in-state refineries:

Jet fuel: With all its 145 airports, including 9 international airports and 41 military airports, the demand is 13 million gallons of aviation fuel daily. Several of those airports have direct pipelines to local refineries. In 2019, California consumed 16.7% of the national total of jet fuel, making it the largest consumer of jet fuel in America.
Gasoline: For its 30 million vehicles, California is the second-largest consumer of motor gasoline among the 50 states, consuming 42 million gallons a day of gasoline, just behind Texas.
Diesel: Diesel fuel is the second largest transportation fuel used in California, consuming 10 million gallons a day of diesel to support the state’s trucking of products from 3 of the busiest shipping ports in America
Arizona and Nevada: California refineries supply 45% of Arizona’s and 88% of Nevada’s transportation fuel demands for their airports, cars, and trucks, so any disruption in California impacts all three states.
California’s northern and southern refinery fuel supply systems are not connected, requiring ocean-going vessels to transport fuel between them.

Fuel Taxes

California has the highest gas taxes in the USA.

CA’s excise tax on gasoline adds $0.60 per gallon.
CA’s “cap-and-trade” carbon tax adds $0.27 per gallon.
CA’s Reformulated Gasoline mandate adds 10-15 cents per gallon.
CA’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard is projected to add $0.37 per gallon in the near term—and $1.15 by 2046!
CA’s “Summer Blend” fuel requirements add up to $0.15 per gallon to the price of gasoline during warmer months.

As a result of the State having the highest cost of transportation fuels in the nation and the highest cost for electricity in the continental USA, California has the highest homeless population in the US, with over 187,000 people experiencing homelessness. This includes a significant portion of unsheltered individuals and a high percentage of homeless veterans, senior citizens, and chronically homeless individuals.

California has obviously not learned much in the 50 years since the Oil Embargo of 1973, as the following persist:

California, the 4^th largest economy in the world, was virtually independent of foreign oil imports in 1973, but due to its relentless regulations to reduce in-state oil production the State now imports more than 70% of its crude oil demand to run the States’ 9 International airports, 41 Military airports, and 3 of the largest shipping ports in America.

Over the last several decades, California’s passion to transition away from fossil fuels has overregulated and overly burdened just the SUPPLY of oil production and refining, but has not reduced the increasing materialistic DEMANDS of the State for the more than 6,000 products and transportation fuels made from those fossil fuels. Thus, China is savoring the future with their many refineries coming online to meet the DEMANDS of California.

California refineries cannot simply increase production to offset the loss from closures, such as the Phillips 66 Wilmington and upcoming Valero Benicia shutdowns, due to a combination of physical, regulatory, and economic constraints. First, most California refineries already operate near their maximum capacity utilization, typically averaging between 85% and 95%, leaving little room for scalable increases without risking operational reliability. Increasing throughput would require significant capital investments in equipment upgrades, hiring, and maintenance capacity—none of which are viable in a state that is actively discouraging fossil fuel infrastructure through aggressive decarbonization mandates.
Second, the California regulatory environment imposes some of the strictest environmental and operational requirements in the world. Any significant increase in refinery output would likely trigger new reviews under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), potentially leading to years-long permitting delays. Additionally, CARB’s requirements for specialized gasoline formulations (CARBOB) mean refineries cannot simply increase production using generic refining methods; instead, they must produce complex, seasonal, and cleaner-burning fuel blends, which require dedicated infrastructure and limit flexibility.

Economically, refiners face a shrinking return on investment. With the 2035 ban on new internal combustion vehicles looming and EV adoption slowly rising, California refiners have little long-term incentive to invest in expanding production. In fact, many are choosing to exit the market or repurpose facilities for renewable fuels rather than double down on gasoline. As a result, the remaining refiners are unlikely or unable to ramp up production to backfill lost supply, leaving California more reliant on imported, California-compliant gasoline from out-of-state or foreign sources, which is slower and more expensive to procure.

A Prager University 5-minute video on the World Without Fossil Fuels provides visual explanations about the demands of the American economy, which will lead to importing manufactured fuels and petrochemicals from new Asian refineries in the coming years, which may soon become a reality, with China coming to the rescue!

Not only does California’s la-la land have a minuscule impact on worldwide emissions, but its growing dependence on refineries in China to meet the enormous demand for transportation fuels to support the state’s public and military airports is becoming a national security risk to the entire United States of America.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

The Economic Imperative for Nuclear Power

By Ronald Stein, Dr. Robert Jeffrey & Olivia Vaughan

July 12, 2025

The Economic Imperative for Nuclear Power

Electricity from nuclear power sources is a necessity to ensure future balanced economic growth that is a lifeline out of poverty and instability for citizens in both developed and developing economies.

In an increasingly electricity-hungry world, nuclear power stands out as a cornerstone for sustainable economic growth, particularly for developing economies like South Africa. This article explores the economic rationale behind nuclear power adoption for electricity, emphasizing the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) and Small Modular Reactor (SMR) technologies as a catalyst for industrial and economic growth that is a lifeline out of poverty and instability.

Countries with fossil fuels should continue to use electricity available from High-Efficiency Low Emissions (HELE) coal, oil, and gas power sources in conjunction with nuclear power to achieve a balanced output and maximise economic growth. Drawing from detailed economic research performed over decades, we highlight why electricity from nuclear is essential for economic stability, job creation, and global competitiveness.

The Urgent Need for Reliable Electricity

In a world where reliable and sustainable electricity sources are crucial, poorer developing countries are spearheading the shift towards nuclear power. The transition to nuclear power generation is driven by the need for dependable, emissions-free electricity to meet the growing demand, particularly highlighted by the increasing requirements of data centres and AI globally. Both electricity and technology are vital for the inevitable transition towards more efficient human systems.

Electricity sources like solar and wind suffer from intermittency, requiring 100% backup capacity, which undermines their reliability. Nuclear power, however, offers a stable, dispatchable, and low-emission alternative, making it a critical component of a balanced electricity mix alongside High-Efficiency Low-Emissions (HELE) coal.

For South Africa, a nation battling unemployment (over 30%) and poverty (affecting 55% of its population), electricity choices are economic choices.

According to the latest Quarterly Labour Force Survey released by Statistics South Africa for Q1:2025, young people aged 15 to 34 make up roughly 50.2% of South Africa’s working-age population, translating to approximately 20,9 million individuals. Within this cohort, the 15-24 age group—representing around 10,3 million individuals—face the highest barriers to entering the workforce, with unemployment figures significantly outpacing that of older youth.

The challenges facing young South Africans in the employment space are not new, but they are trending negatively in many cases. Over the past ten years, youth unemployment has remained persistently high.

The research reveals as a matter of fact, that nuclear power will drive industrial growth, particularly in electricity-intensive sectors like mining and manufacturing, which are vital to GDP.

By 2035, nuclear projects could contribute R39 billion annually to South Africa’s GDP (0.6%), rising to R74 billion by 2045 (1.1%), highlighting its long-term economic potential.

Economic Trends and Global Context

On May 23, 2025, President Trump issued four executive orders as part of the administration’s effort to quadruple U.S. nuclear generating capacity by 2050, promote deployment of advanced nuclear technologies, build out nuclear fuel supply chains, expedite the licensing process, and increase U.S. nuclear exports. The UK has also announced that Rolls Royce SMR has been chosen as the preferred bidder for the UK SMR expansion.

With the global shift towards cleaner technologies, nuclear power generated electricity is gaining market share as countries seek to decarbonize while ensuring electricity. For South Africa, this presents an opportunity to attract foreign direct investment (FDI), which is crucial for economic growth. A robust nuclear sector will reduce perceived investment risks, positioning the country as a leader in modular reactor technology, which is where it started. South Africa was the first country in the world to invest in the commercialization of SMRs and has invested substantially in decades of completed R&D, both through the government and within the private sector.

Globalization demands electricity solutions that are efficient, sustainable, and competitive. Nuclear generated electricity aligns with this trend, offering a reliable baseload power source with a minimal environmental footprint compared to other electricity generation technologies.

Sectoral analysis reveals that nuclear power supports key industries. Mining, contributing 8% to GDP, and manufacturing, at 13%, require consistent power that wind and solar cannot provide. Nuclear projects will stimulate related sectors, such as construction and engineering, creating a multiplier effect across the economy that will, through ripple effects, catalyze prosperity and the much needed GDP growth in an economy struggling with 0,1% GPD growth and 0,2% population growth.

Policy Implications and Economic Significance

Effective electricity policies are pivotal. Pricing must reflect true costs, including environmental externalities, rather than relying on government subsidies that distort markets. Nuclear power’s low operational costs and high efficiency offer a sustainable model where electricity generation can be accurately predicted over a long period, providing a springboard for truly sustainable economic growth. Moreover, it will significantly enhance the balance of payments, a chronic issue for South Africa due to its reliance on imported energy technologies.

By leveraging domestic uranium reserves and PBMR/SMR innovations like the HTMR-100, the country could reduce imports, projecting an annual surplus of R8 billion on the current account by 2045.

FDI and skills development are additional benefits, as nuclear projects require a skilled workforce, addressing South Africa’s skills gap and fostering long-term economic resilience. The construction phase alone will create over 33,000 direct jobs and 154,000 indirect jobs within a decade, supporting over a million dependents through the dependency ratio.

Moving Forward for a Resilient Future

Most developing and emerging economies have a dilemma. On the one hand, there is intense global political and social pressure to limit their emissions of Carbon and Greenhouse gases (GHG); on the other hand, they face high unemployment and poverty levels. Every country needs to assess its economic and social needs.

Nuclear generated electricity, particularly SMR technology, is an economic imperative for South Africa, offering a reliable, cost-effective, and environmentally friendly solution. Its adoption will drive GDP growth, create jobs, and enhance economic sovereignty, setting the stage for a sustainable future.

Backed by rigorous analysis and expert insights, our report reveals a clear path to sustained economic growth and job creation through strategic investment in nuclear power, offering investors a stable, long-term opportunity in a sector poised to drive South Africa’s electricity security and industrial competitiveness.

All countries need to pursue reliable, efficient, environmentally friendly electricity sources capable of generating and distributing dispatchable electricity to their industry and citizens. Nuclear generated electricity is undeniably the most reliable, cleanest and most sustainable way to do this.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

California’s Net-Zero Emissions Plan is a ‘National Security’ Risk for America

By Ronald Stain, PE and Nathan Hammer

July 5, 2025

The DEMAND for the products and transportation fuels made from fossil fuels continues to increase while the State has only focused on choking off the SUPPLY.

California’s “Green” and “Net Zero” policymakers that wish to “transition away from fossil fuels” have focused on reducing just the SUPPLY of in-state oil production and refining to reduce emissions but have offered no backup plan to maintain the supply chain of the products and fuels to support the 4th largest economy in the world.

The States’ contribution to global emissions is a small percentage, roughly 0.75%. To put that into perspective, if the “big earthquake” hit California, and the entire state fell into the Pacific Ocean, there would be less than a 1% reduction in Worldwide emissions. The amount of money paid by the 40 million Californians to meet those net-zero green policies is staggering!

“Green” and “Net Zero” policymakers mistakenly believe that wind and solar renewable ENERGY will replace fossil fuel ENERGY!

Today, we’re a materialistic society. Wind and solar cannot make EV’s, asphalt, tires, or any of the products or fuels that are made from fossil fuels.

REALITY CHECK: Fossil Fuels and wind and solar do different things:

Fossil fuels are the supply chain source for all the products and transportation fuels that are demanded by economies, societies, and all the infrastructures.
Wind and solar (made from fossil fuels), can ONLY generate ELECTRICITY.

As reported by Californians for Energy Independence, California’s Economy is Supported by Oil and Gas, so, let’s look at the States’ demands for the products and transportation fuels that so-called renewables like wind and solar CANNOT make for society, as they can ONLY generate electricity under favorable weather conditions.

The West Coast gasoline, diesel, and aviation fuels market are isolated from other supply/demand centers as California is an energy island isolated from the States East of the Sierra Mountains. The Sierra Mountains are a natural barrier that prevents the state from pipeline access to any of that excess oil from fracking, or from transportation fuels manufactured East of the Sierra Mountains.

Refinery Closures:

Last year, in October 2024, Phillips 66 announced that it would close its Wilmington-area refining complex this year, which will further reduce in-state gasoline, diesel, and aviation fuels production capacity, wiping out more than 8% of the state’s crude oil processing capacity. Losing another 1.3 billion gallons in annual gasoline output will only worsen the state’s supply challenges to meet the demands.
The recent announcement that the Valero Benica Refinery in Northern California will be closing by the end of 2026 was disappointing, but shockingly, a prelude to more closures in the future. The Valero refinery at Benicia represents almost 9% of the state’s crude oil processing capacity to meet the materialistic demands of the States’ residents and businesses.

Rising Regulatory Costs for Oil and Gas:

California’s environmental regulations have driven up costs for oil and gas operations, further limiting in-state production. The Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) and Cap-and-Trade program add significant expenses, with LCFS compliance costing refiners $0.15–$0.20 per gallon and Cap-and-Trade allowances totaling $150–$200 million annually for the industry per the California Air Resources Board Cap-and-Trade Program Data. Permitting delays and environmental reviews also burdens producers, with compliance costs up to $500,000 per well. These costs have contributed to a 40% drop in California’s oil production since 2000, accelerating refinery closures and increasing reliance on foreign oil, heightening national security risks.

Fuel demand from in-state refineries:

California transportation fuel demands for airports, trucks, and cars have staggering numbers:

Jet fuel: With all its 145 airports, including 9 international airports and 41 military airports, the demand is 13 million gallons of aviation fuel daily. Several of those airports have direct pipelines to local refineries. In 2019, California consumed 16.7% of the national total of jet fuel, making it the largest consumer of jet fuel in America.
Diesel: Diesel fuel is the second largest transportation fuel used in California, consuming 10 million gallons a day of diesel to support the state’s is trucking of products from 3 of the busiest shipping ports in America.
Gasoline: For its 30 million vehicles, California is the second-largest consumer of motor gasoline among the 50 states consuming 42 million gallons a day of gasoline, just behind Texas. Gasoline is just 1 of the more than 6,000 products made from fossil fuels to meet the materialistic demands of societies and economies.
Arizona and Nevada: California refineries supply 45% of Arizona’s and 88% of Nevada’s transportation fuel demands for their airports, trucks, and cars so any disruption in California impacts all three states.

In the more immediate term, China has plans for multiple new refineries, with at least five projects expected to be completed by 2028, and another three new refineries by 2030, contributing to a broader shift towards integrated petrochemical facilities. These eight new Asian refineries coming online by 2030 are a reality that China will be coming to the rescue to meet the transportation fuel demands of California!

That $8.8 billion revenue source from fuel taxes will diminish in the years ahead as heavier EV’s are being mandated in California to replace the lighter internal combustion engine vehicles. Fuel taxes that contribute to the $8.8 billion to maintain the roads are a result of California having the highest gas taxes in the USA.

California has obviously not learned much in the 50 years since the Oil Embargo of 1973, as the following persist:

Rather than increase crude oil production from its terminal decline in California, Governor Gavin Newsom supports importing oil from foreign countries to meet the demands of Californians, and remains oblivious that maritime transport, including oil tankers, is estimated to contribute about 3% of global GHG emissions and 27% of freight transport emissions.
California, the 4^th largest economy in the world, was virtually independent of foreign oil imports in 1973, relying on just 5% of crude oil imports to meet the demands of the State. But due to its relentless regulations and restrictions over the last 50 years to reduce in-state oil production the State now imports more than 70% of its crude oil demand from foreign countries like Ecuador, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Colombia to run the States’ 9 International airports, 41 Military airports, and 3 of the largest shipping ports in America.

Not only does California’s la-la land have a minuscule impact on worldwide emissions but is a national security risk to the entire United States of America due to its growing dependence on refineries in China to meet the humongous demands for transportation fuels to support the demands of the States’ international and military airports, and the diesel fuel to support the demands for trucking of the products received at three of the busiest terminals in America to the rest of the country.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Trump Administration Advocates for Nuclear Power

Co-authored by Ronald Stein, Oliver Hemmers, and Steve Curtis

June 24, 2025

Affordable and reliable electricity from nuclear power sources is a necessity to ensure future balanced economic growth that is a lifeline out of poverty, and security for citizens around the world.

While we have seen the acceptance and advancement of nuclear power explode in the United States just over the last year or so, the recent executive orders issued by President Trump have added a strong endorsement of nuclear power.

Reading through these executive orders, it seems that there are clear commitments to remove the roadblocks that are slowing down progress in the name of safety.

The primary roadblock over the last 50 years has been the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) with its 3,000 employees. In addition to the $1 billion allocated in the Federal budget, at least 80% of the NRC budget is funded by fees paid by applicants for licensure, which amount to $300 per hour.

The tenor of the Order is to impel the NRC to establish procedures to ensure that new reactor applications are processed to completion in 18 months (or less) while renewal applications take 12 months (or less). These are ambitious culture changes for the organization, especially since they are ordered to do so while reducing staff. No agency of the US Government likes to reduce staff and, indeed, the NRC will claim that such an accomplishment is too onerous to achieve. Nothing new here. It remains to be seen whether the executive order is robustly enforced.

The Navy’s seven-decade safety track record with nuclear-generated electricity to support national security began before the establishment of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and its subsequent regulatory framework. Commercial nuclear power plants utilize the light water reactor design, pioneered by the US Navy. All submarines and aircraft carriers are powered by nuclear energy. Operating more than 80 nuclear-powered ships, the United States Navy is currently the largest naval force in the world.

Nuclear power reactors remain the safest industry, by far, in the US and around the world. In fact, no person has been hurt by the normal operations of any commercial nuclear power plant anywhere in the world in almost 7 decades (Three Mile Island and Fukushima accidents hurt nobody, and Chernobyl was not under “normal operations” when it catastrophically failed).

Given this safety record, it would seem very easy for the NRC to establish a process to certify systems that are already so safe. It begs the question of why we need the NRC at all. The point is that nuclear safety should be viewed under the scrutiny of a long record of safe operation, not by the myopic view imposed when very little operational data was available. This is especially true during a time when many people claim to want “clean air” and the demand for reliable electricity is expected to ramp up to unprecedented levels. We will now discuss the first of the recently published nuclear power executive orders.

NuScale, the only company successful in attaining a license for a Small Modular Reactor, expended 10 years and $500 million to attain such a license. This stoppage of progress should appall everyone.

It has been clear for several decades that the onerous regulations and nearly impossible task of attaining a license to build and operate nuclear reactors has pointed to the US Government as the primary obstructer for the nuclear power community.

Changes in regulations and delays in approvals have forced huge cost overruns. Nevertheless, the two reactors completed in this realm, Vogtle 3 and 4 in Georgia, still offer competitively priced electricity for the grid.

Therefore, removing the US government’s obstacles to progress appears to be the path to even cheaper electricity through nuclear power. A further development, not yet resolved, is to open the electricity market to free enterprise. The cost reductions available through competition in this market are huge, indicating that such a move may be next in line. We certainly encourage the government to further withdraw from the mix and deregulate electricity from its current monopolistic framework.

The Executive Order, rightfully so, identifies the radiation protection model, the Linear No-Threshold (LNT) model, as a further costly imposition on nuclear power plants with no added safety advantage. For a deeper analysis of this issue and a more sensible model called Sigmoid, No-Threshold (SNT), please consult Jack Devanny’s excellent book, “How We Can Make Nuclear Cheap Again”.

The point here is that if we overregulate safety, we will add significant costs to products that are unnecessary, as they do nothing to improve safety. Again, the excellent record of nuclear power plants over 7 decades should tell us that.

If we imposed similar safety restrictions on automobiles (no harm to people), we would end up with a car that weighed 10,000 pounds, got 3-4 miles per gallon, and was restricted to no faster than 10 mph on the road. Yet, citizens accept the over-40,000 deaths caused by automobile operation annually in the US to enjoy their benefits.

Yet, nuclear power reactors have a track record of no deaths under normal operations and suffer the most onerous safety regulations among all industries. Environmental damage is likewise extremely minimal. So, relaxing the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) will not increase environmental danger either.

So, if you want cheaper, cleaner, and reliable electricity, get these government monkeys off the backs of companies trying to bring you much more affordable and cleaner electricity. This Executive Order recognizes this reality and is moving to reduce these unnecessary and expensive regulations.

The Executive Order includes a goal of increasing nuclear power by 300 GW (moving it from 20% of current demand for electricity to 80% in the US) by 2030. This is a tall order, but America put a man on the moon with slide-rule technology in the 1960s, so the US certainly can attain this goal. We simply need to return to fair market processes and free enterprise. The companies exist, and the technology exists to do this now. We just must set them free. This Executive Order also calls for this.

Finally, the Executive Order calls for more streamlined NRC licensing processes that utilize fewer personnel. If we have smart people in nuclear power technology, wouldn’t they be best used to advance the technology rather than stop it? As mentioned earlier, we are discussing the safest industry in the world over the last seven decades. Indeed, this alone should greatly reduce the need for scrutiny.

So, the President has established his priorities (there are three other parts of this Order we will consider in future articles). Get the government out of the way of progress and allow free enterprise to bring us cheap, clean energy. He also encourages the recycling of slightly used nuclear fuel (SUNF). As pointed out in previous articles, by using fast reactors, the current stockpile of SUNF could power the US at its current demand for electricity for 270 years.

Indeed, the most expeditious path to the disposition of this material should be encouraged, and no plan exists today to dispose of this material in the US. Accelerating the process would produce far more electricity than our current and future needs, so (more supply than demand) would force the retail price of electricity to pennies per kWh or less. The nay-sayers for nuclear power have not improved their rhetoric for decades and still offer the same propaganda they have always exaggerated, with no comparison to the safety record of this industry and no consideration of its benefits.

Perhaps it is time to weigh the benefits against the risks. If we do, nuclear power comes out way ahead of other electricity production methods. This Executive Order is at least a step in this direction. We need to ensure it is enforced and strengthened to allow for an improvement in quality of life at a cost of pennies per kWh of electricity for everyone in the world.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

The Uglier Side of Electric Vehicles

By Ronald Stein, PE

June 13, 2025

Disposing of the EV Batteries

The toxicity of Electric Vehicle batteries, from old or burned-out EV’s, is an even UGLIER side than what is shown in the Larry Elder documentary “The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, of Electric Vehicles”

The recent California fires, where the Palisades and Eaton fires have collectively destroyed at least 12,000 structures, had a higher-than-average numbers of electric vehicles, officials said. Those fires provided a real time sequel of an uglier side of EV’s not discussed in the recently released Larry Elder documentary “Electric Vehicles: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly”, i.e., how to dispose of those old or burned out EV batteries.

After the wildfires ravaged homes in Los Angeles, California, cleanup crews faced a new challenge: Electric car batteries that can explode when damaged as shown on 60 Minutes.

It’s appalling that the policymakers, JUST in wealthy countries, are setting “green” policies that continue to support humanity atrocities and environmental degradation in poorer developing countries that are mining for the exotic minerals and metals to go “green”.

In those wealthy countries, government mandates and tax incentives for people to buy EVs are shockingly a way to provide financial incentives for China and Africa to continue the exploitation of their people with yellow, brown, and black skin that mine for the exotic minerals and metals needed to construct an EV battery, and inflicting environmental degradation in their developing countries so those in wealthier developed nations can go “green”.

Lithium-ion batteries have become a mounting issue after wildfires, given the rising sales of hybrid and electric cars, particularly in California. It is well publicized that California will require 35% of new vehicles sold in the state to be zero-emission by 2026, and all new vehicles to be zero-emission by 2035, BUT the State lawmakers totally avoid any discussions about the Uglier side of Electric Vehicles – how to dispose of the batteries from old or burned-out EV’s.

These are just a few of the subjects that Net Zero policymakers NEVER discuss:

Lithium-ion batteries are very touchy. If they’re punctured, crushed or overheated, they can short-circuit, catch on fire or even explode. Things can get nasty when they do. EV battery fires can reach temperatures topping 1,000 degrees and emit toxic gases.
Extinguishing an EV battery fire requires a large amount of water, potentially thousands of gallons, depending on the specific battery and fire conditions. EV battery fires can take hours and tens of thousands of gallons of water to extinguish — unique challenges for firefighters. Lithium-ion batteries, particularly those using nickel manganese and cobalt oxide (NMC) cathodes, are more prone to thermal runaway and require even more water.
Burning electric vehicles (EV) batteries release toxic gases that pose risks to health and the environment. These gases include hydrogen fluoride, which can cause severe respiratory and skin damage. When burned, these batteries also release toxic vapors such as hydrofluoric acid and can leach toxic heavy metals into the ground.
If damaged or overheated, lithium-ion batteries can ignite or even explode — residual heat sets off a chain reaction that causes the batteries to heat up uncontrollably and spontaneously combust, a process that can happen over days, weeks or months.
Additionally, the combustion of EV batteries can release other toxic substances like carbon monoxide, hydrogen cyanide, and heavy metals, according to a news article from the University of Miami.

As cleanup efforts continue in the Los Angeles area neighborhoods marred by wildfires, one of the biggest challenges is the large number of lithium-ion batteries that were caught in the flames. The cleanup process is complex and resources intensive.

The California Office of Emergency Services has already sent hazmat teams to inspect homes in the Palisades and Eaton fire areas for lithium-ion batteries and flag where they’re present. The EPA has what it refers to as a battery recovery team that oversees efforts to collect them. Chris Myers, a lithium-ion battery technical specialist involved in the EPA cleanup, said. “It is very likely that these batteries were not all consumed in the fire, so now they’re damaged, which means they’re all dangerous,” he said. Myers explained that the battery systems in hybrid and electric cars are well-protected, so even vehicles that were damaged by the fires may still have charged batteries.

Handling the batteries requires a great deal of technical sophistication and care. The EPA team must wear flame-resistant clothing underneath disposable protective suits. Masks cover their faces, and either come with insertable cartridges to filter out chemicals or attach to air tanks. The crew blocks off the area where it’s working and keeps water on site in case flames erupt.

Before they can be sent to a waste or recycling facility, the collected batteries must be de-energized so that they hold no charge or very little charge. To do that, Myers said, the EPA will likely use a process developed after the Maui wildfire in 2023, which involves submerging the batteries in a solution of saltwater and baking soda. Once the batteries have lost their charges, they can be crushed with a steamroller or shipped to a facility in special packaging and eventually sent to a recycler who can salvage the critical minerals in them.

Readers are encouraged to view the Larry Elder documentary “Electric Vehicles: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly“ to learn more about the shell game wealthy countries are using to exploit developing countries to support so-called clean and green electric vehicles, and decide for themselves if the world economies and the environment can accommodate EV’s to satisfy the transportation needs for all, not just the few elites on this planet.

And now, as the early EV are aging, we need to deal with an even uglier side of Electric Vehicles –disposing of the toxic EV batteries from old or burned-out EV’s, that are polluting the air we breathe and the grounds we walk on.

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

The Amount of Money Wasted on Net-Zero Green Policies is Staggering!

Co-authored by Ronald Stein, P.E. and John McBratney

June 1, 2025

So-called renewables ONLY generate electricity but CANNOT make products or transportation fuels for a materialistic economy.

“Green” and “Net Zero” policymakers mistakenly believe that wind and solar renewable ENERGY will replace fossil fuel ENERGY!

• REALITY CHECK: Renewables and Fossil Fuels do different things.

From the 16th to the 19th centuries whale oil was inedible and was used principally for lighting, lubrication and the manufacture of soap, textiles, jute, varnish, explosives and paint. Whales were hunted almost to extinction in the mid 1800’s.

Today, “Green” and “Net Zero” policymakers setting policies are oblivious to the reality that so-called “renewables”, ONLY generate electricity but CANNOT make anything like the more than 6,000 products in our materialistic economy, nor the transportation fuels that supports cars, trucks, ships, construction equipment, and airplanes.

• In addition, everything that NEEDS Electricity, like iPhones, computers, X-ray machines, defibrillators, and datacenters are made with petrochemicals manufactured from crude oil, coal, or natural gas.

Interestingly, going “green” with wind and solar generate occasional electricity under favorable weather conditions is only affordable by the few wealthy countries that can mandate the huge subsidies.

All “Green” and “Net Zero” policymakers remain unavailable to participate in educational conversations about Energy Literacy, as these sources do different things!

• Renewables ONLY provide for the generation of electricity, totally dependent on favorable weather conditions.
• Crude oil once refined provides more than 6,000 products and transportation fuels to economies around the world.

Infrastructures that did not exist 200 years ago DEMAND continuously increasing supplies of the more than 6,000 products that are made from fossil fuels for our materialistic societies inclusive of:

• Hospitals
• Airports
• Military
• Medical equipment
• Telecommunications
• Communications systems
• Space programs
• Appliances
• Electronics
• Sanitation
• Heating and ventilating
• Transportation – road, rail, ocean, and air
• Construction – roads and buildings

The world’s population is not addicted to fossil fuels, but they are dependent on all the products and transportation fuels. Today, “Green” and “Net Zero” policymakers that wish to “transition away from fossil fuels” need to offer a backup plan to maintain the supply chain of the products and fuels to support all the above-mentioned infrastructures, and to date there has been no such plan offered or suggested There is no “green” or “Net Zero” product or technology available anywhere in the world today that offers any form of reliable back-up for wind and solar power generation – none!

Most people in the wealthier developed nations are unaware that 80% of the 8 billion people on planet earth, in poorer developing nations, are living on less than $10/day and cannot subsidize themselves out of a paper bag, thus any suggestion that heavily subsidized solar and wind systems are viable is simply stargazing

Today, the homeless actually “represent“ how 80% of humanity live around the world as those homeless in the wealthier developed nations are a visual reality to a world without fossil fuels.

If those more than 6 billion people on this planet living on less than $10/day are ever going to join the industrial revolution, they will need a supply chain of the 6,000 products supporting the materialistic demands of the infrastructures that did not exist 200 years ago, before fossil fuels, as well as an increasing demand for continuous and uninterruptible electricity, i.e., the case for nuclear power.

A basic need for our “Green” and “Net Zero” policymakers is to understand that electricity did not exist before we learned how to refine raw crude oil.

• Electricity came AFTER oil, as ALL electrical generation methods from hydro, coal, natural gas, nuclear, wind, and solar are ALL built with the products, components, and equipment that are made from oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil,
• All EV’s, solar panels, and wind turbines are also built with the products, components, and equipment that are made from the oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil.
• It is of note that most so-called renewable energy products are manufactured in countries that primarily use coal fired power generation, so they are not “green” at all. A good example is electric vehicles that utilize huge Lithium Ion based batteries.
• All the transportation fuels for cars, trucks, merchant ships, aircraft, and military are made from raw crude oil.
• Getting rid of crude oil would eliminate all six ways of generating electricity, and the more than 6,000 products in demand by hospitals, airports, communications, and would paralyze virtually all transportation!

Another basic need for our “Green” and “Net Zero” policymakers is that they understand that raw crude oil is just black tar that is virtually useless, unless it can be refined into derivatives that are the basis of more than 6,000 products in society that did not exist before the 1800’s, and the various transportation fuels like gasoline, diesel, and aviation fuels that are also made from that raw crude oil. They also need to understand that this process requires the availability of economically priced and reliable electric power.

Policymakers need to STOP using the word ENERGY and start referring to the demands of the economy for reliable supply chains of:

• Products, i.e. more than 6,000 that are made from oil derivatives manufacture from oil.
• Transportation Fuels, i.e., to support demand of cars, trucks, ships, and airplanes.
• Electricity, i.e., economically priced, continuous and uninterruptable.

It is worrisome that the “Green” and “Net Zero” policy makers in all Western countries presently spending billions on solar and wind generated electricity completely ignore proven scientific and engineering research by widely qualified academics and engineers that shows conclusively that carbon dioxide has only a minuscule effect upon global temperatures, thus the whole world-wide Net Zero push is all for nothing, it is unnecessary! The amount of money wasted upon Net Zero world-wide is staggering.

It’s scary that our “Green” and “Net Zero” policymakers are setting “energy” policies that are mandating subsidies, directions, and tax breaks, when they have no comprehension of the subject of ENERGY.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Newsom Relinquishing Control of California to China to Meet Energy Needs?

By Ronald Stein, P.E. and Mike Umbro

May 17, 2025

While the economy DEMAND continues to increase for products and fuels, Newsom continues to destroy the SUPPLY of oil and refining to meet those DEMANDS – China coming to the rescue!

California’s Governor Newsom has been on this planet for 57 years and has yet to publicly recognize that modern life requires the use of fossil fuels to function. California is the fourth largest economy in the world. We require the PRODUCTS and TRANSPORTATION FUELS made from fossil fuels to meet the materialistic DEMANDS of humanity and our economy. Our crude oil demand exceeds 1.8 million barrels per day – this demand has proven inelastic over time.

Valero’s Benicia Refinery began operations in 1968, the same year Governor Gavin Newsom was born. More than five decades later, California still consumes over 1.8 million barrels of oil each day to meet its demands for the fuels and products made from oil. Despite advances in technology and efforts to transition toward renewable electricity, the fundamental structure of our economy remains deeply reliant on fossil fuel-derived products and transportation fuels.

From jet fuel and diesel to the thousands of petroleum-based components in electric vehicles (EVs), wind turbines, and solar panels, fossil fuels remain essential to our daily lives. While renewable electricity plays an important role in power generation, it cannot replace the raw materials and complex hydrocarbons refined from crude oil that are vital to every sector—from hospitals and national defense to communications and transportation.

California’s energy policies, particularly the mandate to phase out internal combustion vehicles and transition to EVs, addresses only a portion of our petroleum usage—namely gasoline. However, the electric vehicle itself, and its components, are manufactured using fossil fuel-based materials.

Meanwhile, demand for aviation and diesel fuels remains high:

• California consumes 13 million gallons of jet fuel per day, 16.7% of the national total to support its 145 airports, inclusive of 41 military airports and 9 international airports.
• The state uses 10 million gallons of diesel fuel daily to support its 35 million registered vehicles.
• Arizona and Nevada depend on California for 45% and 88% of their fuel needs, respectively.

Infrastructures that did not exist 200 years ago that DEMAND continuously increasing supplies of the products and fuels made from fossil fuels are:

Newsom wishes to “transition away from fossil fuels” but he has offered no backup plan to maintain the supply chain of products and fuels to support all the above-mentioned infrastructures.

While California policies are doing everything possible to eliminate oil production and refining out of the state with over-regulations, taxes, and environmental programs, China is ramping up its oil refinery capabilities.

This is not a partisan issue. A secure, affordable, and environmentally responsible energy future requires a pragmatic, science-based approach. We must:

• Recognize the enduring role of petroleum-based products in society.
• Ensure a stable and resilient domestic energy supply chain.
• Support innovation in both renewable and traditional electricity sectors.
• Plan responsibly for transition timelines that reflect technological and logistical realities.

As California continues to lead in climate ambition, it must also lead in practical, inclusive energy planning. The stakes—for our economy, environment, and national security—demand nothing less.

China openly supports political activism in California and is savoring the future with their many refineries coming online to meet the DEMANDS of the American society.

With the upcoming closures of the Phillips 66 Refinery in Southern California in 2025, and the Valero Refinery in Northern California in 2026, a growing national security concern would result from our growing dependence on China to meet the humongous demands for transportation fuels by California, Arizona and Nevada. The two refinery closures represent almost 17% of the state’s crude oil processing capacity to meet the materialistic demands of the States’ residents, and much of the transportation fuels needs in AZ and NV.

As California intensifies regulatory and tax burdens on in-state oil production and refining, other nations, particularly China, are rapidly expanding their refining capacities. At least eight new refinery projects are planned in China by 2030. These facilities will not only serve their own domestic growth but increasingly export refined products to nations like the U.S., offsetting California’s declining supply.

This shift carries serious implications. Offshore refining to meet U.S. demand contributes to higher global emissions, limited domestic job creation, and increased dependence on foreign supply chains—potentially weakening our national resilience and security.

Compounding the growing need for more importation to meet the materialistic demands of society will be the West Coast port’s ability to receive transportation fuels as marine facilities in California face increased congestion and dramatic vessel limits.

Our modern infrastructure—airports, hospitals, military bases, and even sanitation systems—cannot function without continuous access to petroleum-based fuels and products. Yet, California’s energy strategy focuses overwhelmingly on restricting domestic supply without a clear, scalable alternative to meet persistent demand.

The reality is this: limiting the local supply of the fuels and products made from oil without reducing demand doesn’t solve the climate challenge, it simply shifts environmental and social impacts overseas, often to countries with less stringent environmental protections and labor laws.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, of Electric Vehicles

By Ronald Stein

May 12, 2025

A recently released 90-minute documentary is a MUST viewing by everyone to enhance their Energy Literacy about the shell game wealthy countries are using to exploit developing countries.

Electric vehicles are being mandated in California, but Governor Newsom is oblivious to the fact that it’s just another product that cannot exist without oil, as all the thousands of parts and components of EV’s, from tires, insulation, and computers, are made from the oil derivatives manufactured out of crude oil.

Newsom’s efforts to “transition away from fossil fuels” has yet to comprehend that humanity is not addicted to fossil fuels, but they are addicted to the PRODUCTS and TRANSPORTATION FUELS made from those fossil fuels to meet the materialistic DEMANDS of humanity and the economy. Despite the DEMAND for the products and transportation fuels that so-called renewables CANNOT make, only wealthy economies, like that in California, have “green” movements and are pursuing them with mandates and costly subsidies.

The recently released documentary “Electric Vehicles: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly” isn’t just another documentary that lazily cheerleads the industry, though there is a fair amount of marveling at the technology and underscoring its benefits and potential. It’s an enlightening, educational, and entertaining 90-minute documentary that is a MUST viewing by everyone to enhance their Energy Literacy and help them decide for themselves if EV’s are good, bad, or ugly.

The documentary is available for purchase at $12.99
The documentary is available for a 72-hour lease for $9.99

The documentary demonstrates the environmental degradation, and humanity atrocities to people with yellow, brown, and black skin, in those poorer developing countries, to be unethical and immoral JUST for materials to make EV batteries. The documentary is narrated by Larry Elder, a talk radio host, author, politician, lawyer, and former candidate for Governor of California.

Planet Earth’s resources are limited! Our 4-billion-year-old planet has limited natural resources like oil, gas, coal, lithium, cobalt, manganese, etc. that are being extracted at alarming rates. Even with technological advances in the next few decades by those in wealthier countries, we may find “more”, but at current rates of extraction of those resources, the planet may be sucked dry in 50, 100, 500, or 1,000 years, so the question for our conversation is: Should there be a greater focus on the limitations of earth’s natural resources now being extracted for the enjoyment by wealthier countries on Earth as our 4-billion-year-old planet will continue to be here, with or without humans,?

Planet Earth’s resources are limited! Our planet has limited natural resources, including fossil fuels, but especially critical minerals (employed in many new energy systems), such as lithium, cobalt, manganese, various Rare Earth Elements (REE) and many basic industrial metals currently being extracted at unsustainable rates, and mainly from poorer developing countries, under dire working conditions, without labor or health protections, and causing serious environmental impact, due to the unsophisticated extraction processes employed.

With technological advances by wealthier countries, in the next few decades we may find “more”, but at current rates of extraction, the planet may not be able to provide those resources for very long, and in many cases, not even for a century. Wealthy countries refuse to put a greater focus on the limitations of earth’s natural resources currently being extracted for the enjoyment of wealthier countries, since they do not understand that our 4-billion-year-old planet will continue to be here, with or without humans.

The documentary educates the viewers about the critical minerals and metals needed to support the much touted “energy transition” to EVs, wind turbines, solar panels and batteries, come from unreliable, unstable or poorer developing countries such as China, some African nations, and others. Those countries have minimal labor laws and poor environmental controls, so that their production of the critical minerals and metals needed for going “green” results in serious environmental degradation, dire social consequences, and human rights abuses to their population, predominantly made up of people with yellow, brown, and black skin. All this, just to support “clean” electricity in wealthier countries.

Question: Do you believe it is ethical and moral for wealthy countries to continue subsidies to go “green”, when they encourage China and African countries to CONTINUE exploiting many who work under miserable conditions, and when such subsidies entrench financial incentives for environmental degradation, just to support producing EV batteries, wind turbines and solar panels, mostly for wealthier countries”?

The extraction rates and R/P (reserves to production) ratio for many of the critical minerals and metals needed for going “green” are alarming, and most of these natural resources are NOT being replenished. This suggests a worrisome possibility of an unsustainable approach to the current policies of subsidies for “green” energies. Furthermore, even countries with the largest reserve base face important challenges to increasing production growth to meet projected future demand.

LITHIUM: In 2024, the world mined about 240,000 tons of lithium, almost three times the amount mined in 2020. The International Energy Agency (IEA) projects that demand for lithium will increase to 450,000 tons per year by 2030. Despite a significant world resource base, production of those resources remains a major challenge.
COBALT: In 2024, the world produced an estimated 280,000 metric tons of cobalt, the highest amount ever recorded. The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) was the world’s leading producer, accounting for 74% of the global total, while the country is known for the major problems with child labor and poor working conditions of its mineral sector.

Today, a typical EV battery for a Tesla sedan requires substantial raw material extraction for the battery’s minerals and metals of lithium, cobalt, nickel, manganese, copper, aluminum, graphite, plus the steel, plastic, and other metals for battery casings.

The documentary raises concern about those “blood minerals”, mostly from developing countries, come from mining at locations in the world that are never inspected or seen by policymakers and EV buyers.

The mining and refining involve large quantities of raw materials. The estimated total mass of raw materials mined and processed for an EV battery, including overburden and waste rock—might range from 50,000 to 100,000 pounds, depending on battery size, chemistry, and mining efficiency.

The current rates of extraction of natural resources, such as coal, gas, lithium, cobalt, etc., to support the generation of electricity, are clearly unsustainable. Humanity is unable to replace those natural resources on Planet Earth, and obviously, the production sources will eventually run out.

At current rates of extraction of natural resources, the technically and economically available world resource base may be sucked dry in a few centuries, but our 4-billion-year-old Planet Earth will continue to exist in the solar system, with or without humans.

The documentary should be viewed by so-called zero-emission policymakers in the few wealthy countries that have disrupted the delivery of electricity with strict regulations, preferential subsidies, and cancellation of proven baseload sources like coal, nuclear and even natural gas. They should have solidified other sources, to ensure that the availability of affordable electricity that is continuous and uninterruptible would not be disrupted for consumers.

Readers are encouraged to view the documentary “Electric Vehicles: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly“ to learn more about the shell game wealthy countries are using to exploit developing countries to support so-called clean and green electric vehicles, and decide for themselves if the world economies and the environment can accommodate EV’s to satisfy the transportation needs for all, not just the few elites on this planet.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Another Refinery Closure in California Increases States Dependency on China

By Ronald Stein, P.E. and Mike Umbro

May 2, 2025

With an upcoming Valero Refinery closure in California, the 5th largest economy in the world will be more dependent of China for its demands for transportation fuels and oil derivatives to make products.

Over the last several decades, California’s passion to transition away from fossil fuels has overregulated and overly burdened just the SUPPLY of oil production and refining but has not reduced the increasing materialistic DEMANDS of the world for the more than 6,000 products and transportation fuels made from those fossil fuels. Thus, China is savoring the future with their many refineries coming online to meet the DEMANDS of society.

Governor Newsom’s policies, just on the “supply” side of the equation, continue to force California, the 5th largest economy in the world, to be the only state in contiguous America that imports most of its crude oil demands from foreign countries. California crude oil production is in terminal decline, driven by the lack of drilling permits, despite ample reserves. That dependence on foreign imports has increased imported crude oil from foreign countries from 5 percent in 1992 to more than 60 percent today of total consumption.

The West Coast gasoline, diesel, and aviation fuels market is isolated from other supply/demand centers as California is an energy island isolated from all States East of the Sierra Mountains. The Sierra Mountains are a natural barrier that prevents the state from pipeline access to any of that excess oil from fracking East of the Sierra Mountains. As such, the West Coast is susceptible to unexpected outages of West Coast refineries as it is unable to backfill an unexpected loss in supply of crude oil.

Because California is an isolated energy island market with no incoming oil pipeline connections over the Sierra Mountains from other states, in-state refinery closures will increase importation to meet demands for transportation fuels – sourced primarily from foreign countries like China, Saudi Arabia, Ecuador, Iraq, Columbia, and Russia.

California transportation fuel demands have staggering numbers from the in-state refineries:

• With all its 145 airports, inclusive of 9 international airports and 41 military airports, that demand 13 million gallons of aviation fuel daily. In 2019, California consumed 16.7% of the national total of jet fuel, making it the largest consumer of jet fuel in America.
• For its 30 million vehicles, California is the second-largest consumer of motor gasoline among the 50 states consuming 42 million gallons a day of gasoline, just behind Texas.
• Diesel fuel is the second largest transportation fuel used in California, consuming 10 million gallons a day of diesel to support the state’s 35 million registered vehicles.
• California refineries supply 45% of Arizona’s and 88% of Nevada’s transportation fuels, so any disruption in California impacts all three states.
• California’s northern and southern fuel supply systems are not connected, requiring ocean-going vessels to transport fuel between them. The efforts of California toward the oil production and refining “supply” have had minimal impact on the growing materialistic “demands” of what is made from those fossil fuels.
• The mandating for a transition to EV’s has had minimal impact on gasoline consumption as most EV’s are second vehicles for low milage usage. The workhorse vehicles for major milage demands are still reliable and affordable internal combustion engines.
• Hospitals and airports continue expanding to meet the demands of society. Both hospitals and airports did not exist 200 years ago as they only exist today because of the more than 6,000 products and transportation fuels made from fossil fuels.

Today, Asia is the region with the greatest number of future petroleum refineries. As of 2021, there were 88 new refinery facilities in planning or under construction in Asia for manufactured gasoline, diesel, and aviation fuels used by every transportation infrastructure, and the military, as well as the manufactured oil derivatives that are the basis of most every product being used by mankind.

• These eight new refineries include the Yulong Petrochemical complex and the Huajin Aramco Petrochemical Company, as well as expansions to existing refineries like the Sinopec Gulei refinery.

The upcoming closure of Phillips 66 Refinery in 2025, and the Valero Refinery in 2026 will not reduce the materialistic demands of society for the products and fuels from those refineries. The state will obviously be importing less crude oil to refine, but instead, will be importing transportation fuels manufactured in China, the same transportation fuels that are no longer manufactured at those two closed California facilities. Yes, the big winner to meet the continuously increasing demands for the products and fuels from refined oil, appears to be China.

On another front, the current “tariff wars with China” received repercussions from China. China controls most of the rare earth’s metals around the world, thus it is a national security risk to America! They are now playing those cards, which will start to impact the supply chain of those materials to meet the demands of USA manufacturers.

• China has halted critical exports as the trade war intensifies. China has suspended exports of a wide range of critical minerals and magnets, threatening to choke off supplies of components central to the demands of automakers, aerospace manufacturers, semiconductor companies and military contractors around the world.

• Shipments of the magnets, essential for assembling everything from cars and drones to robots and missiles, have been halted at many Chinese ports while the Chinese government drafts a new regulatory system. Once in place, the new system could permanently prevent supplies from reaching certain companies, including American military contractors.

With closure of the Phillips 66 Refinery in 2025, and the Valero Refinery in 2026, a similar national security concern would result from our growing dependence on China to meet the humongous demands for transportation fuels by California, Arizona and Nevada.

It’s obvious that the Net-Zero emission policies within California, and their lack of comprehension of “supply AND demand”, and the subsequent over regulations, mandates, and taxes just on the SUPPLY side of the equation, are causing a national security situation for the entire country’s DEMANDs for the products and fuels made from the fossil fuel industry. In the meantime, China is silently supporting the efforts of California and savoring the future with their many refineries coming online to meet the materialistic DEMANDS of society.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Net Zero Policymakers Remain Oblivious That Electricity Came AFTER Oil!

By Ronald Stein, P.E.

April 16, 2025

All the parts and components to generate electricity are made from oil derivatives manufactured from oil.

Lifestyles are driven by the materialistic and transportation fuel demands of society, of which so-called wind and solar are incapable of fulfilling.

All the climate change alarmists blame emissions from fossil fuels, but they have yet to identify a back-up plan for “something” that will support the demand for products and fuels of current lifestyles in wealthier countries and that of developing economies.

Today, “Net Zero” policymakers setting “green” policies are oblivious to the reality that so-called “renewables”, ONLY generate electricity but CANNOT make anything. In addition, everything that NEEDS Electricity, like iPhone and computers, are made with petrochemicals manufactured from crude oil, coal, or natural gas.

Electricity came AFTER oil, as ALL electrical generation methods from hydro, coal, natural gas, nuclear, wind, and solar are ALL built with the products, components, and equipment that are made from oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil,
All EV’s, solar panels, and wind turbines are also built with the products, components, and equipment that are made from the oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil.
All transportation fuels for cars, trucks, merchant ships, aircraft, and military are manufactured from raw crude oil.
Getting rid of crude oil would eliminate electricity, and the more than 6,000 products in demand by hospitals, airports, communications, and the 8 billion on this planet, and would paralyze virtually all transportation!

The ruling class in wealthy countries are not cognizant that the planet populated, after oil, from 1 to 8 billion, over the last 200 years.

Lifestyles before the 1800’s were drastically different as the world did NOT have any of the following infrastructures that were all made from the products and components made from the oil derivatives manufactured from raw crude oil.

Transportation
Hospitals
Medical equipment
Appliances
Electronics
Telecommunications
Communications systems
Space programs
Heating and ventilating
Military

In addition, all the above infrastructures need electricity, the same electricity that is based upon wire, insulation, etc., that are made from the same oil derivatives manufactured from raw crude oil.

Today, we have more than 50,000 merchant ships, more than 20,000 commercial aircraft and more than 50,000 military aircraft that use the fuels manufactured from crude oil. The fuels to move the heavy-weight and long-range needs of jets moving people and products, and the merchant ships for global trade flows, and the military and space programs, are also dependent on what can be manufactured from crude oil.

We’ve had more than 200 years to “clone” oil to support the supply chain of products demanded by society and have been unsuccessful.

Most likely the 80% of the 8 billion on this planet living on less than $10/day would like to live the materialistic lifestyles of those in the wealthier developed countries.

Today, wealthier countries HAVE ALL the ABOVE infrastructures and have greater longevity than the other 80% on planet earth.

Yet, Net Zero policymakers around the world remain oblivious that Electricity came AFTER oil. Today, Net Zero and decarbonization pledges are a dime a dozen.

Australian Public Service has targeted Net Zero by 2030.
The German government has a target of net zero emissions by 2045.
California has an aggressive decarbonization scheme. It is committed to a “just and equitable transition to carbon neutrality by 2045.
The UK’s net zero target is 2050.
Canada plans to hit net zero by 2050.
EU, Japan, and South Korea are targeting net zero by 2050.
The Biden administration — remember them? — pledged that the US would achieve net zero “no later than 2050.
India targeting net zero by 2070.
China claiming it will hit net zero “before 2060.”
According to the Clean Energy States Alliance, 24 states, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia, have “100% clean energy goals.”

Shockingly, all the above worldwide Net Zero policies to rid the use of fossil fuels would eliminate electricity, and the more than 6,000 products supporting the 8 billion on this planet, and ground all transportation dependent on the fuels made from crude oil!

There’s a huge and growing gap between these worldwide decarbonization pledges and the ever-increasing global demand for the products and fuels from hydrocarbons.

According to the International Energy Agency’s Global Energy Review, hydrocarbon growth exceeded the growth in renewables last year. The report also shows that oil, natural gas, and coal provide more than five times as much primary electricity to the global economy as the political darlings of the moment, those so-called renewables

According to the IEA, oil consumption and natural gas continue to increase. While oil and gas are pivotal fuels, the global climate story continues to be defined by coal. Last year, global coal use increased, as well as power generation from coal plants. The IEA’s reports show that soaring coal use and electricity demand in China (population: 1.4 billion) and India (population: 1.4 billion) is swamping all the climate policies and decarbonization efforts in the US, Canada, Europe, Japan, and South Korea.

Before the decarbonization pledges go into effect and significantly reduces the availability of the products and fuels made from oil that are supporting the humanity on Earth, all the worlds’ Net Zero plans NEED to be amended to identify the “replacement” to fossil fuels that can support the growing materialistic demands and the increasing demand for transportation fuels for the 8 billion on this planet.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

South Africa Needs all the Products and Transportation fuels that Renewables CANNOT provide

Co-authored by Ronald Stein, Dr. Robert Jeffrey and Olivia Vaughan

April 11, 2025

Today, policymakers setting “green” policies are oblivious to the reality that so-called “renewables”, ONLY generate electricity but CANNOT make anything.

Oil, coal, and gas are foundation to the global economy, contributing to thousands of products—estimated at over 6,000—that underpin modern living standards. These fossil fuels drive economic activity by providing energy and raw materials for industries, transportation, and manufacturing, while their derivatives permeate everyday life, from plastics to medicines.

The IEA Oil Market Report – March 2025 forecasts global oil demand reaching 103.9 million barrels per day (mb/d) in 2025, up 1 mb/d from 2024, with non-combusted uses (e.g., plastics, chemicals) growing from 15 mb/d in 2022 to 20 mb/d by 2050 (BP).

US Energy Secretary Chris Wright affirmed that Africa must be free to harness its vast energy resources without interference. NJ Ayuk, Executive Chairman of the African Energy Chamber says Secretary Wright’s message is a long-overdue recognition that Africa needs investment, not interference. “Africa’s energy future must be decided in Africa, not dictated by foreign governments pushing policies that undermine our economic potential. The AEC welcomes this shift in U.S. policy and calls on African leaders to capitalize on this moment by accelerating oil and gas development, creating jobs and driving industrialization.”

Contributions to Living Standards

These products profoundly enhance living standards by powering modern infrastructure, mobility, and health. Transportation fuels the logistics that deliver EVERYTHING that people need to live productive and prosperous lives. The IEA Oil Market Report – March 2025 notes Asia, led by China, accounts for 60% of 2025 demand growth, driven by petrochemical feedstocks critical for plastics and fertilizers.

Plastics improve food preservation and healthcare affordability (e.g., medical devices 30-50% cheaper than alternatives), while gas-derived fertilizers boost crop yields by 50%, feeding half the world’s population. Coal’s role in steel and cement supports urban housing for 4 billion people, and synthetic fabrics (oil-based) cut clothing costs by 20-30%, benefiting billions. Pharmaceuticals from petrochemicals have historically extended life expectancy, and lubricants enhance industrial efficiency, stabilizing supply chains.

Since 1900, fossil fuel products have doubled living standards by enabling industrialization and access to goods.

South Africa’s Energy Mix

The green factions are becoming louder in South Africa as their funding dries up from sources such as USAID and the JET. China is laughing all the way to the bank, building 95 GW of new coal and manufacturing subsidized renewables using products made from oil and ethically questionable rare earth minerals.

This while President Donald Trump has vowed to reboot the US coal industry to counter the economic advantage China has gained: “After years of being held captive by Environmental Extremists, Lunatics, Radicals, and Thugs, allowing other Countries, in particular China, to gain tremendous Economic advantage over us by opening up hundreds of all Coal Fire Power Plants, I am authorizing my Administration to immediately begin producing Energy with BEAUTIFUL, CLEAN COAL,” President Trump wrote on social media platform Truth Social.

Equally concerning is the refining capability and gas cliff situation in South Africa, as Sasol projects the LNG supply from Mozambique to run dry by 2027. Sasol’s CTL process exemplifies coal’s added value, producing synthetic fuels and chemicals, contributing over $10 billion yearly to South Africa’s economy and supporting 30,000 jobs. Why would the country not exploit the opportunity to make use of its rich coal supplies, and further reduce its reliance on imported refined products.

Local petrol, diesel, jet fuel and gas (LNG) prices are exacerbated by USD/ZAR exchange volatility and drastic price increases in refined fuel products will immediately put inflationary pressure on consumers. South Africa currently only has two operating refineries left, Astron in the Western Cape and Natref in Gauteng (Interior). The rest have been mothballed or shut.

The South African State owned utility, Eskom with its coal fleet, earned the Best Power Company in the world in 2001, but has since been hollowed out by failed policies, corruption and mismanagement. Coal still provides over 80% of South Africa’s energy supply, but it has been under extreme pressure from the EU and other pro-renewables organizations to transition to purely renewables that can only generate electricity but CANNOT make any products or fuels. This is simply not an option for South Africa. It will lead to the continuation of the rolling blackouts that the country has been facing, despite 14 years of an extensive Renewable Independent Power Producer program that has cost billions of dollars.

The so-called “renewables”, ONLY generate electricity but CANNOT make anything. Thus, the country needs all the Products and Transportation fuels that Renewables CANNOT provide, along with Nuclear Power stations. This is the only viable option that will lead to a fair and equitable chance to prosperity for the 62 million in South Africa, and the 1.2 billion people living in Sub-Saharan Africa who rely on essential goods and services.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Nuclear Generated Electricity Saves an Electricity-Starved World

Co-authored by Ronald Stein, Oliver Hemmers, and Steve Curtis

March 25, 2025

Electricity from nuclear power is continuous, uninterruptable, emission free, and utilizes the least amount of earth’s natural resources to generate electricity.

Only the few wealthy countries have spent hundreds of billions of dollars subsidizing what they call “renewable energy” in the name of “carbon-free electricity” that is unreliable and weather dependent. Yet, despite picking our pockets through taxes and borrowing to support humongous subsidies for wind and solar, our direct costs are rising for electricity, our electric grid is becoming more failure-prone, and we still live with a monopolistic system, called utilities, of marketing electricity.

There is nothing more critical to our quality of life than all the 6,000 products made from oil derivatives manufactured from raw crude oil, and continuous and uninterruptible electricity. So, what good has all our tax money done for normal citizens to ease their lives as those renewables only generate electricity, but CANNOT make any products demanded by our materialistic society?

The best way to ensure delivery and low prices of electricity for our materialistic society is a free enterprise system free of useless and expensive regulations. So why are we allowing electricity to be marketed to us in the most expensive and precarious way imaginable?

It is common sense that if huge subsidies are needed to make a commodity viable in the market, then such a commodity is not viable in a free market. So, why do we pay such excess levies? Indeed, why are there subsidies for renewable electricity at all when about 80% of the global population of 8 billion people are living in less developed countries?

We have pointed out that nuclear power, when marketed in a levelized free-enterprise system with fair laws for all, is by far the cheapest way to produce electricity that is safe, continuous, uninterruptible, emission free, and utilizes the least amount of the earth’s natural resources to generate that electricity.

Yet, we continue to trust wealthy country governments’ intervention (remember you pay for all government expenditures) when the result is higher prices, less safe delivery systems, and effectively no lowering of pollution from poorer developing countries. Common sense would tell us that something is wrong.

All of us should be environmentalists at heart. Our daily purchases and actions should contribute to the preservation of clean air and water on the planet. Yet, we also care about our quality of life and our peaceful existence on this planet. So, we make compromises. One such compromise would be to ensure that any replacement for electricity production would be better than what we abandoned. We would also prefer not to abandon an existing solution until an even better solution comes along.

Nuclear power has earned the reputation of being the safest industry in the world. Not a single person has been harmed by a commercial nuclear power plant under normal operation in more than 70 years. About 10% of the world’s electricity, and about 20% of the US electricity is produced with nuclear power. That is a lot of production, and such a safety record is certainly worth noting.

♦ Before you write letters, nobody was harmed in Three-Mile Island or Fukushima from a failed reactor, and Chernobyl was not under normal operation when it failed. Perspective is based on perception, and we want to present this perception since so many people seem to believe differently.

Why is your perception so important? Well, if fear drives your perspective, you may tolerate more expensive or environmentally destructive methods of power production which are not to your advantage. This attitude is especially devastating in a monopolistic market in which you are not free to choose the merchant you think is best. You get what you get, and you don’t throw a fit. But we are not kindergarten children, we are thinking, discerning consumers, right?

A common-sense approach would be to have all production facilities in place before we start shutting down existing, perfectly good facilities. We should not change over until we got a cheaper price on the new commodity. Since electricity delivered on the grid is all the same, why would we pay more for something we could get cheaper? Yet, our electricity prices have skyrocketed of late on top of our being forced to expend our hard-earned tax money as well.

We have shown in other articles that recycling slightly used nuclear fuel (SUNF) from existing stockpiles could produce such a volume of electricity that it would be delivered at around a penny per kWh. It is safer, more compact, more available, cleaner and less imposing than all other forms of electricity generation. Since we are constantly producing more SUNF than we can use, it is also renewable. We still need petroleum for most of the products in our society that did not exist 200 years ago, and aviation, gasoline, and diesel fuels for transportation infrastructure since it is also compact and widely available. So, why are we paying trillions of dollars in subsidies for more expensive and less available electricity? Shouldn’t that be a consumer choice?

Unlike those living in Russia and China, US citizens have a direct choice of who our leaders are. Over the last 60 years, they have bankrupted our treasury while making our quality of life lower, at least in our most important factor, electricity. It may be time to demand a return to free-enterprise and away from artificial fear to improve our lives. Consider this perspective and make your desires known. No politician can stand up to popular demand.

For once, let us drive demand instead of being told what we are going to suffer with. Nothing will improve world quality of life in the developing countries like free or penny per-kWh electric power and access to the more than 6,000 products being enjoyed by those in the wealthier developed countries. Nuclear technology is here, and we have the time to innovate without disrupting our lives if we only demand our right to free enterprise in electricity production and delivery. The nuclear technology is here. We only need the shackles of government subsidy and overregulation to be released to allow it to happen.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Bogus Myths Created to Promote Renewables

By Ronald Stein, PE

March 13, 2025

Wind and Solar can ONLY generate intermittent electricity but CANNOT make any products for our materialistic society.

So-called renewable energy is ONLY intermittently generated ELECTRICITY from renewables, as wind turbines and solar panels CANNOT make any products, or fuels for the various transportation industries.

In fact, those renewables of wind turbines and solar panels CANNOT exist without oil, as all the parts and components of the net zero emissions fantasy from wind turbines and solar panels are 100% dependent on the oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil, the same oil that net zero enthusiasts want to rid the world of.

Today, American policymakers setting “green” and “zero emissions” policies are oblivious to the reality that electricity came about AFTER the discovery of oil. Without oil, there would be no electricity!

ALL six methods for the generation of electricity from hydro, coal, natural gas, nuclear, wind, and solar are ALL built with the products, components, and equipment that are made from oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil.
All EV’s, solar panels, and wind turbines are also built with the products, components, and equipment that are made from the oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil.
Everything that needs electricity to function like iPhones, computers, data centers, and X-Ray machines are all made with petrochemicals manufactured from crude oil. Without fossil fuels, there would be nothing that needs electricity!

The Bogus Myths for the generation of occasional and unreliable electricity that also kills birds, bats, and whales and lays waste to farmlands and forests and oceans are numerous:

1- It is claimed that wind and solar renewables are green and kind to the environment.

Humongous mining requirements occurring in developing countries for the exotic minerals and metals from this 4-billion-year-old planet earth’s natural resources, the same ones that are not being replaced.
The Pulitzer Prize nominated book “Clean Energy Exploitations – Helping Citizens Understand the Environmental and Humanity Abuses That Support Clean Energy does an excellent job of discussing the lack of transparency to the world of the green movement’s impact upon humanity exploitations in the developing countries that are mining for the exotic minerals and metals required to create the batteries needed to store “green energy”. In these developing countries, these mining operations exploit child labor and are responsible for the most egregious human rights violations of vulnerable minority populations. These operations are also directly destroying the planet through environmental degradation.
Minimal or even non-existent labor laws in poorer developing countries to protect people against humanity atrocities of people with yellow, brown, and black skin.
Minimal or even non-existent environmental laws and regulations laws in poorer developing countries to protect against environmental degradation to local landscapes from the massive mines scarring the landscape to produce the copper, silver, cobalt and rare earth metals required.
Maximum usage of this 4-billion-year-old planet earth’s natural resources, the same ones that are not being replaced for future generations.
Humongous “footprint” of land compared to the generation of electricity via nuclear, natural gas, hydro, or coal.
Emissions will be exploding from those poorer developing countries, i.e., the other seven billion on this planet. Unlike the wealthy countries that have huge economies that can subsidize any delusionally obsessed idea, but those poorer countries dismal economies cannot subsidize themselves out of a paper bag!
To manufacture each EV auto battery that weighs 1,200 pounds, you must process 25,000 pounds of brine for the lithium, 30,000 pounds of ore for the cobalt, 5,000 pounds of ore for the nickel, and 25,000 pounds of ore for copper. All told, just one Tesla EV battery requires the processing of more than 500,000 pounds of materials somewhere on the planet.

2- It is claimed that renewables are cheap.

Only the wealthier developed countries can afford the humongous subsidies required to build renewables like Germany, Australia, Great Britain, New Zealand, all of the EU, and the USA.
With about 80% of the global population of 8 billion people living in less developed countries. Much of Africa and South-East Asia are prime examples of this, but also Pacific Ocean Island states. The people in those countries might live on less than $10 per day but the greater problem is that they have little or no access to reliable electricity, nor to the myriad of products manufactured using fossil fuels and their derivatives. The “green” agendas of the developed world are threatening to never allow them access to it.
Wind turbines for the generation of electricity under favourable weather conditions, would be non-existent were it not for government subsidies and mandates behind them.
Net Zero policies raise electricity costs for families and businesses in the wealthier countries that have the ability to subsidize them, and threatens the reliability of the electricity system.
High electricity prices coupled with electricity austerity have led to economic stagnation in many of those wealthier countries.
The cost of renewables is rising but is not recognized or understood for wind turbines, solar panels, and EV batteries

3- It is claimed that renewables will replace fossil fuels.

Despite decades of efforts and billions in subsidies to bolster “green electricity” from weather dependent wind and solar, people still get all of the 6,000 products from oil, the same products that are integral to human prosperity across the globe, that support the demands of infrastructures like: Transportation, Airports, Water filtration, Sanitation, Hospitals, Medical equipment, Appliances, Electronics, Telecommunications systems, Heating and ventilating, and the Space programs.
Everything that needs electricity to function like iPhones, computers, data centres, and X-Ray machines are all made with petrochemicals manufactured from crude oil. Without fossil fuels, there would be nothing that needs electricity!
ALL the parts and components of renewables are built with the products, components, and equipment that are made from the oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil, the same oil that renewables are supposed to replace. Without fossil fuels, there would be no electricity!
Shockingly, the “green” movement has yet to identify a replacement for oil to support the materialistic demand for those 6,000 products made from oil.
We’ve had more than 200 years to “clone” oil to support the supply chain of products demanded by our materialistic society and have been unsuccessful.

Net Zero, only in the wealthy countries that can subsidize renewables, is ineffective in achieving its primary goal and can never stop the weather changing. The impact of Net Zero policies is devastating for the economy and high productivity, electricity, all the more than 6,000 products made from oil derivatives, and the aviation, gasoline, and diesel fuels for our intensive industries in particular. Renewables are not kind to the environment and the lies and bogus myths being told to promote them are untenable.

Thus, before Net Zero enthusiasts destroy the economy, they need to identify the “replacement” to crude oil that will support the materialistic demands of the e8 billion on this planet for all the products made from those oil derivatives, as well as the aviation, gasoline, and diesel fuel needs of the various worldwide transportation infrastructures, before they preach net zero emissions.

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

Small Modular Reactors will Benefit Developing Economies

Co-authored by Ronald Stein, Dr. Robert Jeffrey and Olivia Vaughan

March 7, 2025

Today, with 8 billion humans on this planet, only the few wealthy countries are extracting natural resources to bolster their economies and provide prosperous lives for their citizens.

Earth has existed for more than 4 billion years without present-day humans. In the past, dinosaurs and cavemen never used its plentiful natural resources.

The discrepancy in the allocation of earth’s natural resources between developed and developing economies, emphasizes a critical point affecting the future of the human species.

When we consider the needs of developing economies, we have no choice but to consider that access to electricity is a crucial cornerstone to alleviating poverty, promoting economic growth and improving living standards. It is an essential social and economic indicator. The link between electricity and GDP per capita is one of the strongest correlations in the social sciences. Why are we not utilizing a seemingly endless clean supply of electricity to shine some light on the hundreds of millions of people living in the dark?

Small Modular Reactors (SMR’s) hold the potential to revolutionize the clean electricity landscape by providing scalable and flexible solutions across both the developed and the developing world. Generation IV SMRs do not need to be near any large waterbody at all, a critical factor in many water scarce countries. They also incorporate a number of technological advances to meet the criteria of sustainability, nuclear safety, economic competitiveness and resistance to nuclear proliferation.

Small modular reactor development globally, is in part due to many South African engineers and scientists having been absorbed into private industry in South Africa and all over the world, including the USA. SMR’s have the potential to bring significant benefits to developing economies due to:

Lower initial capital investment as SMRs require a lower upfront capital investment due to their compact size and modular design.
Reduced construction time as SMRs can be deployed relatively quickly, with deployment timelines as short as three years.
Siting flexibility as SMRs can be installed in a variety of locations, including remote areas with less developed infrastructure.
Scalability as SMRs can be scaled up or down to meet energy demands. This flexibility allows developing economies to adjust their energy production as their needs change.
Job creation and economic impact as the construction and operation of SMRs can create jobs and stimulate economic activity.
Enhanced safety as SMRs have simpler designs and use passive cooling systems, making them inherently safer to operate than traditional reactors.

The generally accepted definition of access to electricity includes the provision of electricity, safe cooking facilities, and a minimum level of consumption. The International Energy Agency (IEA) takes a more holistic approach to its definition, requiring households to meet a minimum specified level of electricity, which gradually increases over time and is based on whether the household is in a rural or urban environment. The set minimum threshold is currently at 250 kWh per year for rural households and 500 kW per year for urban households according to the IEA.

According to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), the average annual electricity used by a US residential customer in 2022, was 10,791 kWh. This equates to an average of roughly 900 kWh per month, 43 times the minimum rural threshold accepted by the IEA. We can thus understandably surmise that economic growth in developing economies inevitably requires growth in demand for electricity. Those economies that continue to grow, along with their long-term electricity sovereignty, must therefore develop their nuclear energy capability as a matter of fact rather than of opinion. Referring particularly to South Africa, which is an economy based on developing its mining, industrial and agricultural growth. It must focus its substantial base load electricity and energy growth on domestic nuclear power growth.

As a species, WE CANNOT accurately predict all future economic, technical and energy developments, which may radically change the upcoming economy and other progress of humans. However, we CAN focus on certain existing issues which need to be highlighted as the very reality that cannot be ignored. The proverbial elephant in the room is that there are consequences of those wealthier developed countries avoiding methods to deliver electricity to those in developing countries.

The electricity from wind and solar renewables is weak, intermittent and unreliable. This makes them only suitable for certain situational applications, but the reality is that economic demand to achieve steady growth is for continuous, uninterruptable, dispatchable power. Delivery of electricity to humans makes them suitable to grow industries that provide products and services to the 8 billion on this planet.

Using current nuclear technology methods, the used energy rods are taken out and replaced after approximately five to ten years. However, only 3% of the energy available contained in nuclear fuel is used at this stage and 97% of the energy originally contained in this stored material is still available and can be used. In other words, there is still a further 10 times the energy used still available from the Slightly Used Nuclear Fuel (SUNF) with revised usage methods. It can then be extrapolated that nuclear power will be available to humans for a further 50,000 years or more from these SUNF sources. How are we not as a species, embracing this gift from galactic solar events the universe has bestowed upon us?

Next-generation reactor designs like Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) and advanced fast reactors offer greater efficiency, improved safety features, and a notable reduction of spent fuel.

Two of the co-authors of this article are from South Africa, and they believe their country is well positioned to stand on its rich history of nuclear transparency and compliance as a gateway into Africa, as well as the Middle East and SE Asia. With increased safety, oversight and non-proliferation measures, isn’t it time that the developing world share in the power needed to build resilient economies of their own?

The costings from South African based nuclear companies developing SMR’s, are estimating ~$0.12/kWh by the third plant with no need for back up capacity, cost of capital and disposal costed in. It has an energy availability factor of 95%, all of the time. So, we can accurately predict production. As the modular production supply chain grows and incorporating recycled material, the cost is predicted to reduce to ~$0.01/kWh within the next generation.

Now is as good a time, as we are going to get to take the critical leap as a species to nuclear power. As a species, we can make use of the infinite power that we have access to because of collapsing stars, and hundreds of millions of nova and supernova galactic events across space and time. The infinite light in our universe has sent us the densest form of solar power it could ever muster when we use atoms for peace. Nuclear generated electricity and a rapid roll-out of Small Modular Reactors is the fastest way to cast a lasting beacon of light in forgotten developing worlds living in the dark.

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

Controlling Ways to Generate Electricity Through Subsidies is a Terrible Plan

Co-authored by Ronald Stein and Dr. Cleveland M. Jones

February 26, 2025

The few wealthy countries of Germany, Australia, Great Britain, New Zealand, other EU countries, and the USA, representing less than one of the eight billion on Planet Earth are mandating social changes to achieve net zero emissions in their “small worlds within this planet “. The wealthier countries are committing billions of dollars in subsidies to support the wealthy countries’ chosen winners to achieve net zero emissions, i.e., wind turbines, solar panels, and batteries to store electricity, when weather conditions are unfavorable to wind and solar generation.

Wealthy countries’ wish to rid the world of crude oil, coal, and natural gas, without replacements in mind, is immoral, since extreme shortages of the products manufactured from fossil fuels will result in the tragic loss of billions of lives from diseases, malnutrition and weather-related events, both in the developed world and in developing economies.

Unbeknownst to the wealthy countries, over 2 billion people in the world must collect firewood or animal dung to cook, and close to 800 million live without electricity. They comprise the bottom of the pyramid of the world population, along with 80% of the 8 billion population on this planet that make less than $10/day. These billions of people cannot subsidize themselves out of energy poverty.

The billions of poor in the world are also living in countries with virtually no labor laws or environmental laws to protect their landscapes and health.

The future prosperity of these billions of people in developing countries is contingent on their economic advancement through the rightful access to harness the foundational elements of any flourishing economy, i.e., the strategic use of whatever energy sources may be available to them, including fossil fuels, for electricity and to enjoy the products and fuels that are the basis of all modern infrastructures, such as:

Transportation
Water filtration
Sanitation
Hospitals
Medical equipment
Appliances
Electronics
Telecommunications
Communications systems
Heating and cooling

While billions of people in many parts of the world, such as India, China, Egypt, and many countries in Africa, Asia and the Americas must burn cow dung as a fuel, the few in the wealthy countries believe they can control climate change through subsidies, on this 4-billion-year-old planet.

Only wealthy economies have “green” movements and are pursuing them with mandates and costly subsidies.
Planet Earth’s resources are limited! Our planet has limited natural resources, including fossil fuels, but especially critical minerals (employed in many new energy systems), such as lithium, cobalt, manganese, various Rare Earth Elements (REE) and many basic industrial metals currently being extracted at unsustainable rates, and mainly from poorer developing countries, under dire working conditions, without labor or health protections, and causing serious environmental impact, due to the unsophisticated extraction processes employed. With technological advances by wealthier countries, in the next few decades we may find “more”, but at current rates of extraction, the planet may not be able to provide those resources for very long, and in many cases, not even for a century. Wealthy countries refuse to put a greater focus on the limitations of earth’s natural resources currently being extracted for the enjoyment of wealthier countries, since they do not understand that our 4-billion-year-old planet will continue to be here, with or without humans.
Developing countries are currently the main source for the materials for wealthier countries to go “green”. The current “green movement” technology requires significant REE and ever scarcer metals to make EV batteries, build wind turbines and solar panels, and construct grid storage systems. Those materials are not easily available in the few wealthier countries and are mostly being mined in developing countries. Green energy mandates and subsidies are exploiting people and landscapes around the world and providing financial encouragement to China and Africa for the continued egregious exploitation of vulnerable minority populations, mostly of yellow, brown, and black skin, and financially incentivizing environmental degradation, to support mandated EV’s and subsidized wind turbines and solar panels in wealthier country backyards.
So-called renewable power has proven to be very expensive electricity. The few wealthy countries that have been able to provide heavy subsidies to transition to expensive, intermittent electricity generation from wind and sun have been Germany, Australia, Great Britain, New Zealand, other EU countries, and the USA. These countries represent less than one eighth of the world’s population, but they remain ignorant of the billions in India, China, Egypt, Africa, Asia and Latin America who live on less than $10 a day, and of the billions that have no access to electricity. Wealthier countries avoid discussing and explaining how their “green movement” will help those living in poorer developing countries join the industrialized society that they themselves enjoy.
The supply chain to support zero-emission mandates and subsidies by the few wealthier developed countries must be ethical and moral. Billions of dollars have already been spent to support mandates for the elites of the world, while they refuse to discuss securing sustainable supply chains, promoting responsible sourcing practices and labor and environmental laws and regulations, and ensuring a just and equitable green and digital transition for all, both poor and wealthy.
Before wealthier counties accuse big oil for not having a zero-emission society, they need to ask themselves: “How dare WE in the wealthier countries continue to increase our demand for the products and fuels manufactured from crude oil, which make OUR life more comfortable?” Without a replacement for those fuels and petrochemical derivatives, phasing out oil would undoubtedly phase out most essential industries of modern society, including the medical industry, militaries, transportation, communications, the electrical power industries, as well as many others. The world would face a return to the unenviable lifestyle that existed in the 19^th

Wealthier countries need to participate in conversations that focus on how mandates and subsidies can provide PRODUCTS, FUELS, and ELECTRICITY for the 8 billion on this planet, not ONLY for the few who live in wealthier countries that can afford to subsidize intermittent wind and solar generation of electricity, as well as the costs associated with storage, grid upgrades and backup sources required for a hasty energy transition to a “green” energy world.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

[BIO: Dr. Cleveland M. Jones is technical director and partner at Fronteira Energia, a consultant, and researcher at Instituto Nacional de Óleo e Gás/CNPq/UERJ/Brazil, and was founder and director of several environmental and biotech firms.]

Energy Literacy-Understanding Crude Oils Vital Role

By Ronald Stein

February 13, 2025

Over the last 200 years, and the world has populated from 1 to 8 billion because of the more than 6,000 products and different fuels for planes, ships, trucks, cars, military, and the space programs that did not exist before the 1800’s. Today, the world is a materialistic society.

We have more than 50,000 merchant ships, more than 20,000 commercial aircraft and more than 50,000 military aircraft that use the fuels manufactured from crude oil. The fuels to move the heavy-weight and long-range needs of jets moving people and products, and the merchant ships for global trade flows, and the military and space programs, are also dependent on what can be manufactured from crude oil.

Today, American policymakers setting “green” policies are oblivious to the reality that electricity came AFTER the discovery of crude oil, and everything that NEEDS Electricity, are made with the products made from oil derivatives.

ALL electrical generation methods from hydro, coal, natural gas, nuclear, wind, and solar are ALL built with the products, components, and equipment that are made from the oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil,
All EV’s, solar panels, and wind turbines are also built with the products, components, and equipment that are made from the oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil.
Getting rid of crude oil would eliminate electricity, and all the products that need electricity to operate!

We’ve had more than 200 years to “clone” oil to support the supply chain of products demanded by our materialistic society and have been unsuccessful.

The January 20, 2025 executive order of President Trump, “Unleashing American Energy (UAE)” calls for elimination of the “electric vehicle (EV) mandate” to promote consumer choice and access to gasoline-powered automobiles. It’s true that we have no formal EV mandate, but 22 states have zero-emissions vehicle mandates or executive orders prohibiting sales of gasoline cars by a future date, typically 2035.

The few developed nations are oblivious that “Big oil” only exists because of the wealthier countries being addicted to the products and fuels that are manufactured from fossil fuels that makes THEIR lives more comfortable. The wealthy countries constantly pursue smaller and faster electronics, and bigger and faster planes, ships, and launches into outer space are the only reasons that crude oil is needed.

Seemingly unbeknownst to the “green” movements in the few wealthy countries, that are able to provide trillions of dollars of financial subsidies, and impose government mandates to transition to occasional electricity generation from breezes and sunshine is totally unaffordable by most on this planet.

The future prosperity of billions of people in developing countries is contingent on their economic advancement through the rightful access to harness the foundational elements of any flourishing economy, i.e., the strategic use of fossil fuels and electricity to enjoy the products and fuels that are the basis of all the infrastructures such as: water filtration, sanitation, heating and ventilating, hospitals, medical equipment, transportation, appliances, electronics, telecommunications, and communications systems.

The “green” movement, just in the few wealthy countries that are pursuing them with mandates and humongous financial subsidies, is totally unaffordable by more than 6 billion on this planet! Thus, the world is in desperate need of teachers to be the moderators of Energy Literacy CONVERSATIONS that discuss subjects that will benefit ALL 8 billion on this planet.

Shockingly, wealthy countries like, Germany, Australia, Great Britain, New Zealand, all the EU, and the USA still remain ignorant that 80% of the 8 billion on this planet are living on less than $10 a day. These billions of people cannot subsidize themselves out of a paper bag. How will more than 6 billion on this planet ever see electricity?

Policymakers have no comprehension that crude oil is virtually never used to generate electricity, but when manufactured into those petrochemicals that are the basis of more than 6,000 products, is the basis for virtually all the products that support Hospitals, Medical equipment, Appliances, Electronics, Transportation, Telecommunications, Heating and Ventilating, and Communications systems.

In addition, crude oil is the basis of the various transportation fuels in our materialistic society that did not exist before the 1800’s, now being used in infrastructures like: Transportation, Airports, pleasure aircraft and boats, Space programs, and Militaries.

Before the 1800’s, and before the discovery of oil, the world had NO crude oil, and obviously NO products or transportation fuels, and NO electricity and NO Tesla’s !! Before the 1800’s, Life was hard and short.

Renewables, like wind and solar, only exist to generate occasional electricity. Since these so-called renewables, CANNOT manufacture any of the more than 6,000 products AND the various transportation fuels made from fossil fuels for vehicles, planes and ships, that are demanded by the infrastructures of today, the same infrastructures that did not exist 200 years ago, thus it’s a great time to use President Trump’s executive orders on the subject of energy, to stimulate conversations to enhance everyone’s Energy Literacy.

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Planet Earth’s Natural Resources are Limited to its 8 Billion Residents

Co-authored by Ronald Stein, Dr. Robert Jeffrey and Olivia Vaughan

February 5, 2025

Our Planet Earth has existed for more than 4 billion years without present-day humans. In the past, dinosaurs and cavemen never used the plentiful natural resources on Planet Earth.

Today, with 8 billion humans on this planet, those natural resources are being extracted by the few wealthy countries at alarming rates, and NOT being replenished.

Crude oil consumption is more than 35 billion barrels per year with less than 50 years left of known reserves of oil.
Coal consumption is more than 8 billion tons per year, with less than 135 years left of known reserves of coal.
Natural gas consumption is more than 132 million cubic feet per year, with about 50 years left of known reserves of natural gas.
Similar scenarios for the exotic minerals and metals, like lithium, cobalt, manganese, copper, etc., needed to go “green” with EV batteries, wind turbines, and solar panels.

With advances in technology, motivated with the increasing cost of those resources, we may find other ways to locate and extract more, like the “fracking” technology being used to extract more oil, BUT Planet Earth’s resources are limited!

Our 4-billion-year-old planet has limited natural resources like oil, gas, coal, lithium, cobalt, manganese, etc. that are being extracted at alarming rates. Even with technological advances and increasing values of those resources in the next few decades, we may find “more”, but at current rates of extraction of those resources, the planet may be sucked dry in 100, 1,000, or 5,000 years, but this 4-billion-year-old planet will be here with or without humans. Shockingly, 80% on this planet of 8 billion are living on less than $10 a day.

For the more than 6 billion on this planet that are economically challenged, they may get a sneak preview of coming attractions just by looking at wealthy and expensive California. California, with its 40 million residents representing only a miniscule 0.5% of the world’s 8 billion, is a very expensive state to live in, with the separation of the wealthy and the less fortunate growing wider each day. Using California as an example, with about 12% of the USA population, it accounts for 28% of all people experiencing homelessness in the country, and 49% of all unsheltered people in the U.S., so a question for our Energy Literacy conversation is: Should there be a greater focus on the limitations of earth’s natural resources now being extracted for the enjoyment by wealthier countries on Earth as our 4-billion-year-old planet will continue to be here, with or without humans?

Renewables, like wind and solar, CANNOT exist without the products made from oil and major government subsidies. Wind and Solar can only generate occasional electricity but CANNOT make any of the 1,000s of products made from oil. In fact, renewable energy equipment is one of the 6000+ products made from oil, without oil, wind and solar would simply not exist.

Renewables CANNOT support Transportation

One of the most visible impacts of fossil fuels is their role in modern transportation. Cars, planes, and ships are all constructed from the products made from the oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil, and all powered by gasoline, diesel, or jet fuel—would vanish in a world without fossil fuels.

Renewables CANNOT support Industry and Employment

In a fossil-fuel-free world, affordable housing itself would be a nearly impossible dream. Industrial processes—construction materials like cement, steel, and glass—are all heavily reliant on fossil fuels. Without the products made from fossil fuels, the scope of construction would revert to pre-industrial techniques: wood, stone, and limited quantities of brick.

Manufacturing jobs, which underpin much of the middle-class prosperity, would never have existed. Instead of large factories producing goods for regional or global markets, small workshops might churn out handmade products—slowly and expensively.

Renewables CANNOT support Agriculture and Food Supply

The impact on agriculture is another glaring area of transformation. Modern agriculture depends on machinery powered by fossil fuels and fertilizers synthesized from natural gas. In a world without these advancements, farming would be labor-intensive, with productivity akin to 18th-century subsistence farming.

Grocery stores might be stocked with a meager selection of locally grown vegetables and grains. Exotic imports like bananas or coffee, enabled by fossil-fuel-powered shipping, would be nonexistent. Seasonal shortages would be a grim reality, and even slight droughts or floods could result in famine. food security would teeter on the edge of disaster,

Renewables CANNOT support Healthcare and Medicine

Without fossil fuels would also strip away much of modern healthcare. Consider this: medical equipment, transportation for emergency care, and pharmaceutical production are all deeply reliant on fossil fuels. Everything from life-saving antibiotics to syringes and IV bags require petrochemical derivatives.

In a fossil free world, we wouldn’t have the resources to provide much beyond rudimentary care. The polio vaccine, dependent on sophisticated manufacturing and distribution chains, wouldn’t exist. The mortality rate for childbirth, infections, and injuries would soar.

Renewables CANNOT support Modern Conveniences

Without fossil fuels, there would be no central heating from oil or natural gas. Residents would chop firewood or rely on coal (itself a limited resource in this hypothetical scenario).

homes would be lit by candles or kerosene lamps, cooking might be done over a wood-burning stove, with meals taking hours to prepare. Refrigeration, an unsung hero of modern life, wouldn’t exist, forcing people to salt, smoke, or can food to preserve it—a time-consuming and imperfect solution.

residents bundled in multiple layers during the winter, huddling together for warmth. Without fossil fuels, their standard of living would regress to pre-industrial levels, where mere survival consumed most of their time and energy.

Renewables CANNOT support Education and Communication

Education, the backbone of a thriving community, would also suffer. Without cheap and reliable electricity, schools would be dimly lit, unheated, and sparsely equipped. Children might need to contribute to farm work or family businesses instead of attending school regularly. Advanced subjects like chemistry or engineering would be nearly impossible to teach without modern tools and materials.

Communication would revert to handwritten letters delivered by horseback. News would travel slowly, and international correspondence would be a rare luxury.

Renewables CANNOT avoid an Environmental Irony

Advocates for abandoning fossil fuels often highlight their environmental toll. Yet, in a world without them, we’d see a different kind of environmental degradation. Without synthetic fertilizers, agricultural expansion would devour vast tracts of forest to meet basic food needs. Heating with wood would result in widespread deforestation, and rudimentary industries might still pollute waterways without modern environmental regulations.

Fossil fuels are far from perfect

Ironically, while fossil fuels have undeniable environmental costs, their absence wouldn’t guarantee a pristine Earth. Instead, we’d face the paradox of localized environmental destruction on an immense scale, driven by humanity’s desperate attempts to compensate for the loss of energy-dense fuels. In Africa, this is evident where people have no choice but to chop down valuable indigenous trees to use as fuel for firewood to cook and heat their rudimentary homes. Over 70% of the population of Sub-Saharan Africa relies on wood as their primary household energy source.

Everyone needs to ask each other, Why is it that environmentalists insist on spending money and resources on litigating against the oil, coal, gas and nuclear industries, instead of advancing technologies that truly encapsulate the full circular economy of the energy cycle?

Waste to Energy technologies like tire and plastic pyrolysis go a long way to close the loop between extracting new resources and deriving the most value out of resources that have already been extracted. These technologies should be receiving support and funding, instead of solar and wind, which create toxic waste and only electricity some of the time. Yet, funding and support to commercialize truly clean technologies remains an elusive bottle neck.

Instead of demonizing the energy sources for the products and fuels that built the world we know as home, we should seek balanced solutions that preserve the benefits of modernity while addressing genuine environmental concerns. A world without fossil fuels might look idyllic in the abstract, but in practice, it would resemble a dystopian world that is harsh, impoverished, and unrecognizably bleak.

Without them, our modern “wonderful life” would never have come to be. Reiterating, Planet Earth’s resources are limited! At current rates of extraction by the wealthier countries of limited natural resources like oil, gas, coal, lithium, cobalt, manganese, etc., the planet may be sucked dry in 1,000 or 5,000 years, but our 4-billion-year-old planet will continue to be here, with or without humans while the separation of the wealthy and the less fortunate continues to grow wider each day.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

America Needs to Reestablish Its World-Leading Manifestation of Nuclear Generated Electricity

Co-authored by: Ronald Stein, Oliver Hemmers, and Steve Curtis

January 24, 2025

Insight into today’s worldwide development of nuclear power is provided from the history of nuclear generated electricity.

American ingenuity advanced nuclear technology to a world-class innovation to benefit all. Interestingly, the methods used in the rest of the world are copies of the American innovations.

Now, America seems to be fading into the wallpaper of greed and propaganda. It slinks to massive subsidies to support ancient power generated from breezes and sunshine, like wind and solar. America needs to reestablish its world-leading manifestation of this technology through our secret weapon called free enterprise.

To meet increasing demands for electricity, China, Russia, Japan, and Poland are building additional nuclear power generated electricity, while the USA focuses on weather dependent wind and solar.

Russia and China are currently leading the world in nuclear electricity generation and account for 70 per cent of additional nuclear power capacity. Today, about 60 reactors are under construction across the world. A further 110 are planned.

Today, nuclear power generated electricity is being added around the world:

The nuclear power systems developed for the Navy have functioned well for over seven decades. All U.S. Navy submarines, and aircraft carriers are nuclear powered.
France has more than 50 nuclear power reactors producing more than 70% of France’s electricity.
Japan / New Energy Policy Will Set Nuclear Share Target Of 20% By 2040 Japan’s industry ministry is making final amendments to a policy that will significantly increase nuclear power from the estimated 8.5% that the reactor fleet provides today. Fourteen nuclear power plants have restarted in Japan since the 2011 Fukushima disaster.

Today, about 440 nuclear power reactors are in operation in 32 countries and Taiwan, with 62 new reactors under construction. As of August 1, 2023, the United States had 54 nuclear power plants with 93 operating commercial nuclear reactors in 28 states.

Nuclear power has the competitive advantage of being the only reliable, available, and clean power source that can accommodate the desired expansion of a clean electricity supply to the end users. In fact, nuclear power could supply all the capacity the US needs.

The United States invented and perfected nuclear power as early as the late 1940s. Are we willing to regress while other countries progress? To understand this concept better, let’s review the US nuclear energy development through the years.

As Nazi Germany began to eat away at civilization, the discovery of nuclear fission, the powerhouse of nuclear reactors, was coming of age. Like the uranium born from stardust as the ultimate energy storage, the secret to unlimited electric power for the world exploded upon the scientific community. You have heard of the heroes of this miracle: Curie, Einstein, Meitner, Hahn, Frisch, Bohr, Teller, Fermi, Oppenheimer, and many more. In a strange quirk of fate, the first use of nuclear fission came in the form of a bomb. As bad as war can be, it spurred the invention of radar, jet engines, and nuclear fission devices which all went on to make life better for humans. Nuclear fission became the flowers that grew after the thunderstorms of WWII.

After WWII, President Truman transferred the wartime Manhattan Project bomb design efforts into the genesis of peacetime development of nuclear power by creating the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). President Eisenhower and President Kennedy continued the rapid development of “Atoms for Peace” to produce the first nuclear reactors in conjunction with private enterprise.

Hyman Rickover was another visionary to promote the development of what came to be known as light water reactors because they used the slowing down, or “moderating” of neutrons to produce energy by using the element uranium in an altered or “enriched” form. This program was incredibly successful because the advantage of nuclear power for propulsion was so overpowering. First used in submarines, this technology promised to advance US strategic naval advantage unsurpassed in the world. These submarines were orders of magnitude quieter than diesel models and would not need to be refueled for the entire 30-year life of the submarine consuming uranium the size of a baseball. The first nuclear sub, named the Nautilus after Jules Verne’s famous fictional “underwater home for its crew”, was launched in 1954. Today, the Navy employs a fleet of more than 100 nuclear-powered vessels, including submarines and aircraft carriers.

Meanwhile, the civilian effort to produce commercial nuclear power followed two basic paths. While they were developing the light water reactors for the Navy, a different type of reactor, called the fast reactor, had the edge in the commercial power arena. These are called “fast” reactors because they employed more energetic neutrons by using sodium or molten salt as a coolant instead of water. Some may know these reactors as “breeder reactors”. However, Admiral Rickover chose the light water reactor, famously saying “I would use sodium as a coolant if the oceans were made of sodium”. Since light water reactors were at a more advanced engineering level, it made sense to use this design for the electricity-generating nuclear power plants. The first such reactor went into commercial power production in Shippingport, New York on December 23, 1957. In the next 30 years, more than 100 nuclear power plants came online and provided 19.5% of the electricity in the United States.

Everything went well, and many dozens of reactors were being ordered by utility companies, until 1979. On March 28^th, a series of events caused the reactor core at Three Mile Island number 2 to overheat and began to melt down. Even though the reactor’s safety features prevented any injuries to the public, the media fear-factor kicked into gear. Many people became nervous about nuclear power, and the political world amplified this fear to the point that almost all the reactor orders evaporated. No more reactors were built after 1988 when Palo Verde near Phoenix came online. Other than two reactors which started construction and were finished in the early 2000s, the next reactors to come online, did so in 2022 and 2023 in Vogtle, Georgia. Even though there were 18 reactors closed before their design life, the efficiency (capacity factor) of the electricity production was increased (now better than 90%) such that the percentage of US power supplied by nuclear reactors remains close to 19.5%. Today, 94 commercial reactors are online. Of the 18 reactors closed, 12 of them are in a condition called safe store (SAFSTOR), meaning that they can be brought back on line with some modifications.

More recently, we find that our demand for electricity will go up rapidly. Just like the price of eggs has gone up rapidly because disease has caused the egg production to tank, the price of electricity will go up as other customers bid in the face of rising demand. Many of us can do without eggs, but nobody can do without electricity. When you combine the rising demand with a clamor among media outlets demanding that we do away with natural gas and coal to produce electricity, I guess the prevailing anti-nuclear power opinion is that we all should move into caves and cook with firewood. I guess that would “conserve” electricity, but it would certainly not be the quality of life I would like to devolve to. The obvious conclusion is that people simply will not tolerate such a situation.

We do not have to wait until the market for cave dwellings explode, however. Technology has already come to the rescue. Remember, the Navy still uses 100% nuclear power on their submarines and aircraft carriers. The Army and Air Force are getting into the swing of nuclear power through their project (Project Pele) to migrate to small modular reactor microgrids to power their bases. So, why does US policy so consistently fight against the one innovation in the last century that can provide renewable, clean energy, essentially, forever and certainly until we commercialize a better idea? That is certainly one of the unanswered mysteries of our age.

It appears that the Army and Air Force will inspire the commercial market for small modular reactors just like the Navy did for light water reactors. If you add the fast reactor recycling of the spent nuclear fuel, you can, essentially, create a supply of electricity that is too massive for us to use. The past has shown promise for nuclear power, the military is certainly pleased with it, and it looks to be the only way to out-produce our demand. Toss in recycling in fast reactors, and we can see prices on a fair market approach a penny per kWh. Isn’t that better than the dollar per kWh we are headed for as big business outbids consumers and small business for electricity? We are at a tipping point, but the customer always wins in a free enterprise system, right?

While nuclear power generation is proliferating around the world in China, Russia, and Japan with about 60 new nuclear power plants under construction and a further 110 planned, nuclear power design and construction came to an abrupt end in America in the early 1980’s due to the propaganda of the anti-nuclear movement and a Nuclear Regulatory Commission that seems unable to approve any nuclear reactor designs, despite the sterling proven safety record over 7 decades.

What will it take to stimulate American interest to recapture our leadership in nuclear power implementation and innovation?

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

15 Questions That Will Put an end to the ‘Climate Scare’ Once-and-For-All

By Ronald Stein PE

January 11, 2025

To support the growth of health and prosperity worldwide for the 8 billion on this planet in the coming decades, and the increasing demand for electricity, and for the 6,000+ products in our materialistic society, and for the various transportation fuels ⏤ will challenge humanity’s creativity to support the supply chains to meet those growing demands.

Government-mandated winners and losers are only applicable to those few in the wealthier countries that can afford huge subsidies, but the reality is that there are no silver bullet answers.

For those outside the few wealthy countries, we see that at least 80 percent of humanity, or more than six billion in this world, are living on less than $10 a day, and billions are living with little to no access to electricity.

Politicians in wealthier countries are pursuing the most expensive ways to generate intermittent electricity. Energy poverty is among the most crippling but least talked-about crises of the 21st century. We should not take electricity, products, and fuel for granted. Wealthy countries may be able to bear expensive electricity and fuels, but not by those that can least afford living in “energy poverty.”

It should be one of everyone’s New Year’s resolutions to acquire a passion to stimulate discussions to enhance everyone’s Energy Literacy. To support and facilitate those CONVERSATIONS, at least three are required:

♦ A Moderator: Teacher, student, or Podcast host.
♦ A representative of the products and fuels of our materialistic society and
♦ A representative of the pro-renewables for zero-emissions electricity.

Here are just a few open-ended starter questions for Teachers, Students, and Podcaster Moderators to stimulate 3-way Energy Literacy conversations:

(1) Limitations of just electricity from renewables. Renewables, like wind and solar, only exist to generate occasional electricity. Since these so-called renewables CANNOT manufacture any of the more than 6,000 products AND the various transportation fuels made from fossil fuels for vehicles, planes, and ships that are demanded by the infrastructures of today, the same infrastructures that did not exist 200 years ago, the question for our conversation is: WHY eliminate fossil fuels when there is no known “replacement” to fossil fuels that can support the materialistic demands for products and fuels of the population and economy that are supporting the 8 billion on this planet?

(2) Most of the products in our materialistic society are made from fossil fuels. Everything that NEEDS Electricity, like iPhones, computers, data centers, and X-ray machines, need electricity to function. All the parts of toilets, spacecraft, and more than 50,000 merchant ships, more than 20,000 commercial aircraft, and more than 50,000 military aircraft are also made from the products based on derivatives manufactured from crude oil, so the question for our conversation is: Why rid only the wealthy countries with “green” movements, of fossil fuels as that would just divert the supply chain of oil to refineries in developing countries, to meet the demands for products and fuels that did not exist 200 years ago?

(3) Only wealthy economies have “green” movements. Of the 8 billion now on planet earth, of which 80% are making less than $10/day and lack many infrastructures being enjoyed by those in the wealthier countries such as Transportation, Airports, Water filtration, Sanitation, Hospitals, Medical equipment, Appliances, Electronics, Telecommunications systems, Heating, and ventilating, so the question for our conversation is: Why are the wealthy countries the only ones pursuing a “green movement” with subsidies and mandates?

(4) Planet Earth’s resources are limited! Our 4-billion-year-old planet has limited natural resources like oil, gas, coal, lithium, cobalt, manganese, etc., that are being extracted at alarming rates. Even with technological advances in the next few decades, we may find “more.” Still, at current rates of extraction of those resources, the planet may be sucked dry in 50, 100, 200, or 500 years, so the question for our conversation is: Should there be a greater focus on the limitations of Earth’s natural resources now being extracted for the enjoyment by wealthier countries on Earth as our 4-billion-year-old planet will continue to be here, with or without humans,?

(5) Developing countries are THE only source for the materials for wealthier countries to go “green”. Since the current “green movement” technology requires significant rare earth minerals and metals to construct EV batteries, wind turbines, and solar panels that are not easily available in the few wealthier countries are being mined in developing countries, so the question for our conversation is: Are the wealthy country mandates and subsidies ethical and moral, to continue financially encouraging China and Africa to continue the egregious human rights violations of vulnerable minority populations by exploiting “their” poor with yellow, brown, and black skin, and financially supporting environmental degradation to “their” landscapes just to reinforce mandated EV’s, and subsidizing of wind turbines, and solar panels in “wealthier country backyards”?

(6) The Future of EV Batteries. The first cell phone, more than 50 years ago in 1973, the Motorola DynaTAC, weighed 2.5 pounds and was 9 inches tall. Today’s cell phones are generally under 7 ounces with almost unlimited functions, easy charging, and virtually unlimited applications. In the coming decades, the current 1,000-pound lithium battery in EVs will seem barbaric, just like the first cell phone, future EV batteries will be lighter, cheaper, longer range, and shorter charging times, so the question for our conversation: How long do you think it will take humanity ingenuity and creativity driven by the free enterprise environment, to meet the humongous growing demand for efficient electricity, that will most likely exceed what we experienced in cell phone development that took 5-decades?

(7) Electricity came about AFTER the discovery of oil. ALL six methods to generate electricity, from hydro, coal, natural gas, nuclear, wind, and solar, for the generation of electricity, are ALL built with the products, components, and equipment that are made from the oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil, so the question for our conversation is: Why rid the world of fossil fuels as that would eliminate our ability to generate electricity?

(8) So-called renewable power has proven to be very expensive electricity. The few wealthy countries able to provide heavy subsidies to transition to occasional electricity generation from breezes and sunshine has proven to be ultra-expensive for Germany, Australia, Great Britain, New Zealand, all of the EU, and the USA. These few wealthy countries that currently represent about one of the eight billion of the world’s population still remain ignorant that billions in Africa, Asia, and Latin America still live on less than $10 a day – and that billions still have little to no access to electricity, so the question for our conversation is: How will the “green movement” help those in poorer developing countries join the industrialized society being enjoyed by those in the wealthier countries?

(9) The supply chain to support zero-emission mandates must be ethical and moral. The zero-emission mandates from the few wealthier developed countries require key challenges in the supply chain requirements from the raw materials sector for rare earth minerals and metals that need to be overcome if the electricity generation transition is to be realized, so the question for our conversation is: Why is there no conversation about securing sustainable supply chains, promoting responsible sourcing practices with labor and environmental laws and regulations, and ensuring a just and equitable green and digital transition for everyone, both poor and wealthy?

(10) Nuclear power plants are prolificating around the world. For more than 7 decades, nuclear power has proven to be the safest, most compact, emissions-free, and cheapest way to produce continuous, uninterruptable, and dispatchable electricity; it has resulted in increased activities in China, Russia, and Japan with about 60 new nuclear power plants under construction across the world and a further 110 planned, so the question for our conversation is: Why do you think that America is supporting subsidies for unreliable wind and solar generated electricity that is NOT continuous nor dispatchable, and avoiding nuclear-generated electricity that is continuous, dispatchable, and emissions-free?

(11) Nuclear power generation has an impressive safety track record. America has a track record of almost 70 years of nuclear power plant operation without any injuries, including over 70 years of nuclear Navy reactor operations for all their submarines and aircraft carriers, so the question for our conversation is: Why is there so much public resistance in America to allowing nuclear power to compete with other forms of power generation on the open market?

(12) The USA is falling behind in technological developments in nuclear power generation. While nuclear power generation is proliferating around the world in China, Russia, and Japan, with about 60 new nuclear power plants under construction and a further 110 planned, nuclear power design and construction came to a slow end in America in the early 1980s due to the handling of the anti-nuclear movement and an incompetent Nuclear Regulatory Commission, so the question for our conversation is: What will it take to stimulate American interest to just catch up with foreign countries domination of technological developments in nuclear power generation?

(13) CO2 starvation. The minimum threshold for plant life is 150 ppm of Carbon Dioxide (CO2), but today, CO2 levels are about 420 ppm. Carbon dioxide is essential for life on Earth, as humans need it to regulate respiration and control blood pH, while Plants use it to create oxygen through photosynthesis. So, the question for our conversation is: With CO2 levels today nearing the starvation levels for plant and human life on Earth, why the focus on reducing CO2 levels to end life?

(14) Government-subsidized projects have yet to produce Environmental Impact Reports. To date, all wind and solar generation of electricity has been funded by government subsidies as NONE have been financed by private entrepreneurial investor funds, but all those subsidized renewable projects have yet to be accountable for Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs) that detail the life cycle for renewables that run from design, procurement, and construction through operations, maintenance, and repair, as well as the life-ending decommissioning and disposal or recycling and restoration of the landscaping back to its original pristine condition, so the question for our conversation is: Why are government subsidized renewable projects toward wind, solar, and electric vehicles EXEMPT from the same Environmental Impact Reports that extensively discuss decommissioning, recycling, and restoration of the landscaping back to its original pristine condition for wind, solar, and EV battery materials when they are required when those projects are funded with private money?

(15) Earth’s natural resources are not being replenished. As the world’s population depletes, the 4-billion-year-old Planet Earth’s natural resources of crude oil, coal, natural gas, and the critical minerals and metals to support the “green” movement like lithium, cobalt, manganese, etc., over the next 50, 100, or more years, our grandchildren may be unable to enjoy the more than 6,000 products of our materialistic society, being enjoyed by the current residents on this planet, so the question for our conversation is: To continue the preservation of human life on earth, how do we get serious about conservation, efficiency improvements, and recycling the waste that humans are generating?

The above open-ended questions are intended to facilitate the stimulation of 3-way Energy Literacy conversations among teachers, students, and Podcast Moderators with representatives of the products and fuels of our materialistic society AND representatives of the pro-renewables for zero-emissions electricity.

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Recycling for Sustainable Electricity is the Key for Future Generations

By Ronald Stein, Oliver Hemmers, and Steve Curtis

January 3, 2025

There is a growing need to recycle human caused waste as this Planet’s resources WILL run out

Our planet has numerous resources, but they are NOT unlimited resources. What’s the future of humanity 100 to 500 years from now, after humans have extracted the oil, coal, lithium, cobalt and other resources from the 4.5-billion-year-old Earth?

♦ Worldwide crude oil consumption is currently estimated at roughly 96.5 million barrels per day. According to OPEC, global demand is expected to reach 109 million barrels per day. Estimations vary slightly from other sources as well, but it is predicted that we may run out of global oil from known reserves in about 50 years.

♦ Nothing lasts forever, even the abundant coal on this planet. For coal, we may run out of global coal from known reserves in about 130 years.

As the world’s population depletes the earth’s natural resources over the next 50, 100, or more years, our grandchildren may be unable to enjoy the more than 6,000 products of our materialistic society, being enjoyed by the current residents on this planet. These are products that people need and use every day, without even realizing that they come from the refining process. Without oil, we are back in the stone age.

To continue the preservation of human life on earth, it’s time to get serious about conservation, efficiency improvements, and recycling the waste that humans are generating.

One of the primary areas of focus is the recovery of electricity from waste streams such as tires and plastics.

♦ Tires: The United States generates around 280 million waste tires each year, which is roughly one tire per person. Globally, an estimated 1 billion to 1.8 billion used tires are discarded annually.

♦ Plastic: The world produces around 400 million tons of plastic each year, which is more than double the amount produced at the beginning of the century. Growth: Since the 1970s, plastic production has grown faster than any other material. If current trends continue, global production is projected to reach 1,100 million tons by 2050.

As billions of tires and millions of tons of plastic waste being disposed of annually, these materials represent a vast untapped source of electricity. Traditional disposal methods often lead to environmental pollution and health hazards. Waste to energy technology offers a sustainable alternative by converting these materials into clean electricity while reclaiming valuable products like recovered steel, coke, and carbon black.

There is a growing list of “waste to energy” companies vying for leadership of this revolution, developing and implementing groundbreaking solutions to convert waste into valuable electricity. By focusing on recycling and electricity generation, one of those companies is SOBE, a public utility in Youngstown, Ohio that converts waste into energy through a process called enhanced pyrolysis that is ready to begin helping manufacturing and healthcare companies meet their environmental, social, and governance (ESG) goals while also reducing their electricity costs.

These waste to energy firms provide the recycling and handling facilities for preprocessing hydrocarbon man-made based products such as waste tires and all seven grades of plastic into feedstock used internally within the group’s (WTE) waste to energy conversion technology. The feedstock is converted during the technology process inside their plants into a clean synthetic fuel gas that can be used directly for their operations, or in gas turbines or reciprocating engines for electricity generation. Providing a clean, safe and environmentally friendly solution for the repurposing of these difficult waste streams and reducing landfill usage.

This creates and establishes a true circular economy-based recycling model. Utilizing an inexhaustible stream of man-made waste converted into clean energy. The byproducts produced consisting of carbon black and steel are then repurposed for the greater good of our planet’s resources and the environment.

These waste to energy innovative processes are designed to be highly efficient and environmentally friendly. By combining recycling with electricity generation, the company can minimize waste and reduce the need for additional resources. The reclaimed materials can be reintroduced into the supply chain, reducing the demand for virgin materials and the greenhouse gas emission from production facilities; further contributing to a sustainable economy.

There are several challenges with traditional electricity sources such as coal and natural gas that have long been the primary means of powering our world. However, these sources often come with a host of environmental problems, including:

♦ Greenhouse gas emissions: The burning of fossil fuels releases large amounts of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, contributing to climate change.

♦ Air pollution: Fossil fuel combustion also produces harmful air pollutants, such as particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur oxides, which can have negative health effects.

♦ Depletion of natural resources: Coal and crude oil are finite resources on our 40-billion-year-old planet, and their continued extraction and use are depleting reserves.

Renewable electricity generating sources, such as solar and wind power, only offer an intermittent, but not sustainable alternative to the continuous electricity generation from coal, natural gas, and nuclear. Additionally, the production of solar panels and wind turbines requires significant amounts of electricity and exotic minerals and metals resources to make components of wind turbines and solar panels. They also create another problem with their waste when they are damaged, thrown away, or no longer usable.

The benefits of waste-to-electricity solutions, such as those collaboratively developed by SOBE, offer a promising alternative to traditional electricity sources.

By converting waste into electricity, these solutions can help:

♦ Reduce waste: Waste-to-electricity technologies can divert waste from landfills, reducing the need for new landfills and minimizing the environmental impact of waste disposal.

♦ Generate renewable electricity: The electricity produced from waste is considered renewable because it is derived from a constantly replenished resource.

♦ Reduce greenhouse gas emissions: Waste-to-electricity technologies can help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by displacing coal and natural gas for electricity generation.

♦ Create jobs: The development and implementation of waste-to-electricity technologies can create jobs in the electricity sector and related industries.

The Future of Sustainable Electricity: As the world continues to grapple with the challenges of climate change and resource depletion over the next few centuries of the world’s reserves of crude oil and exotic minerals and metals, there is a growing need for innovative solutions to our demands for electricity. Waste-to-electricity and new technologies, such as those like SOBE is working with, offer a promising path toward a more sustainable and prosperous future.

In addition to their work on waste-to-electricity solutions, SOBE is also collaborating with companies like Optics Consulting and other organizations to develop and commercialize other clean electricity technologies. By fostering partnerships and sharing knowledge, companies can help accelerate the transition to a sustainable electricity future.

Imagine a self-generating behind-the-meter solution that is 100% renewable clean and continuous technology that can be deployed in 4 MW units and can be expanded to the needs of the electricity customers. Technologies like these are coming very soon.

By harnessing the power of waste, or utilizing new innovative technologies, we can focus on continuous and reliable electricity through recycling tires and plastic waste to help reduce our reliance on coal and natural gas, reduce the landfill footprint, protect the environment, and create a cleaner, healthier world for generations to come.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Trump Expected to Annihilate California’s ‘Green Mandates’ – the Most Radical in the World

By Ronald Stein, P.E.

December 21, 2024

Governor Newsom remains oblivious that there is no replacement for oil that provides products that support the 8 billion on this planet.

California Governor Gavin Newsom represents a population of 40 million. The State’s residents are a miniscule 0.4 percent of the 8 billion on this planet, but he has California acting as an independent country with environmental laws, regulations, and mandates unmatched on this planet.

President-Elect Trump recognizes a key fact that Newsom does not, that there is no known “replacement” to fossil fuels that supports the materialistic demands of the population and economy, and thus most “green” movements are projected to be obliterated after Trump’s January 20^th inauguration.

The residents of California, through their silence, provides encouragement for Newsom to continue his net-zero mission that has contributed to the State having the highest costs for electricity and fuels in the nation for the few residing in the State.

The Governor remains ignorant that the other 99.6 percent of the world’s population live outside the borders of the State. Newsom is also oblivious that about 80 percent of the world’s 8 billion, many of which are in Africa, Asia and Latin America still live on less than $10 a day – and the billions who still have little to no access to electricity.

Newsom’s quixotic approach seeks to simultaneously increase occasionally generated electricity from weather dependent wind and solar while reducing the state’s use of natural gas that generates continuous, uninterruptable, and dispatchable electricity.

Wind turbines for the generation of electricity under favorable weather conditions, would be non-existent were it not for government subsidies and mandates behind them. Today, we have towering engines of mass destruction marching across the countryside killing birds and bats and laying waste to farmlands and forests.

The Governor now supports the development of offshore wind generated electricity as part of his renewable electricity goals. California is proposing to build offshore wind turbines to produce an estimated 85,000 gigawatt-hours of power annually to the electric grid.

To meet that goal of 85,000 gigawatt-hoursof power would require 2,500 floating 10 megawatt wind turbines 20 miles offshore, each one about 1,000 feet tall, anchored in water 4,000 feet deep, with high voltage undersea transmission lines connecting each of them to land-based substations.
If these wind turbine monstrosities are ever built, the total project cost will easily exceed $300 billion, with catastrophic consequences to the marine environmentincluding migrating whales, and then, it’s ONLY for electricity as wind turbines CANNOT make any of the more than 6,000 products that our materialistic economy demands

Newsom remains insensitive to wind being one of the most expensive ways to generate electricity, nor is he concerned that wind turbines damage the environment, kill birds, and kills whales.

Special note about a new drama television series, LANDMAN, with Lead Actor Billy Bob Thornton, that supports Energy Literacy:

All the parts and components of California Governor Newsom’s net zero emissions fantasy is 100% dependent on crude oil, the same oil that he wants to rid the world of.

As a Facebook trailer illustrates for the new “Landman” drama television series, created by Taylor Sheridan and Christian Wallace, Newsom is oblivious to the fact that every product in our society, that did not exist 200 years ago, is made from oil.

Thus, before Newsom totally destroys the California economy, Newsom needs to identify the “replacement” to crude oil that will support the materialistic demands of the economy, before he preaches net zero emissions.

Be sure to click on the Facebook Link for a 90-second commercial for the new LANDMAN drama series with Lead Actor Billy Bob Thornton, that summarizes the intellectual ignorance of the green movement:

https://www.facebook.com/reel/1620339808894808

Governor Newsom, who solely picks winners and losers, announced in 2020 that California will ban sales of new gasoline powered vehicles by 2035, BUT remains oblivious to those that purchase those vehicles OUTSIDE of California, or to the 99.6% of those on this planet that live outside the borders of the State.

While the Newsom administration pushed tax credits to incentivize automakers to invest in EVs, the same credits that are financially encouraging Chian and Africa to continue exploiting their people with yellow, brown, and black skin that are mining for the exotic minerals and metals needed for EV batteries, and for those developing countries to continue the environmental degradation to THEIR landscapes, just so America can go green!

Despite decades of efforts and billions in subsidies to bolster “green electricity” from weather dependent wind and solar, Californias still get all of the 6,000 products from oil, the same products that are integral to human prosperity across the globe, that support the demands of infrastructures like: Transportation, Airports, Water filtration, Sanitation, Hospitals, Medical equipment, Appliances, Electronics, Telecommunications systems, Heating and ventilating, and the Space programs.

Shockingly, before a replacement for oil has been identified to support the materialistic demand for those 6,000 products made from oil, field production in California has dropped from 400 million barrels per year in the 1980s to only 118 billion barrels in 2023. Today, despite reserves of crude oil estimated at more than 27 billion barrels, California imports 60 percent of its oil demands.

Ironically, California policies that end oil production in the state drive up imports from nations that lack California’s environmental standards or labor protections and sets up California as a national security risk for the entire country as the State’s 9 international airports, 41 military airports and 3 of the busiest shipping terminals are dependent on foreign oil imports to operate.

California’s gas formulation is unique, from all other 49 States which means only in-state refineries can produce it.

California’s policies attacking oil refineries that manufacture only state-specific formulations continue to cause unprecedented crises. When the Phillips 66 plant closes in 2025, in-state refinery capacity will drop to its lowest level in decades to meet the States’ consumption of 1.45 million barrels per day. With refinery turnarounds needed for periodic maintenance and repairs, a shortage of California’s special fuel formulation is imminent. One blip, and we’ll have gas lines that make 1979 look like a cakewalk.

At the expense of its residents, who are now paying the highest costs for electricity and fuels in the nation, California’s Governor Newsom remains oblivious to the other 8 billion on this planet that are dependent on the products and fuels from oil, the same oil for which there is no known replacement.

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

Click this Link to Sign up for Energy Literacy from Ronald Stein

Stop the ‘Green Hallucinationists’ Plan to Close all 200 Coal Power Plants

by Ronald Stein, P.E. and George Harris

December 19, 2024

China is Building Coal-Fired Power Plants at an Alarming Rate of two new coal plants every week!

America continues to subsidize the development of occasionally generated electricity from weather dependent wind turbines and solar panels, to replace coal power plants, with the expectation that America, with about 4% of the world’s population, can drastically impact the world’s emissions occurring from the other 96% people on this planet.

Coal is the world’s most abundant and reliable energy source. The United States has the world’s largest coal reserves. Of the 15 major coal producing States, Montana has the largest coal reserve with 118.4 billion tons.

There are about 200 coal-burning power plants still operating in America, with many concentrated in Pennsylvania, Texas, Indiana, and the Powder River Basin of Wyoming and Montana, i.e. only 8% of the world’s coal plants.

Worldwide there are over 2,400 coal-fired power stations, i.e., the other 92% of the world’s coal plants.

Right now, China already has a total of 1,142 operating coal-fired plants and is building six times as many coal-fired power plants as the rest of the world combined – China is building the equivalent of two new coal plants every week

Most in the wealthier developed counties are oblivious that about 80 percent of the world’s 8 billion, many of which are in Africa, Asia and Latin America still live on less than $10 a day – and the billions who still have little to no access to electricity. For others, life is severely complicated and compromised by the hypocritical “green” agendas of wealthy country elites who have benefited so tremendously from fossil fuels since the modern industrial era began in the 1800’s.

While wealthier countries are shelling out billions of dollars in subsidies for so-called clean ELECTRICITY from wind and solar, those poorer developing countries cannot subsidize themselves out of a paper bag.

Developing countries desperately need dependable, affordable electricity and the products and fuels manufactured from fossil fuels to create jobs, lift families out of poverty, modernize homes, schools, and hospitals, provide clean water, and replace wood and animal dung for cooking and heating.

Even today, for the more than 6 billion on this planet living on less than $10 a day, millions of parents and children die from respiratory and intestinal diseases that are unheard of in wealthy countries, because they don’t have electricity nor any of the 6,000 products made from oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil that did not exist before the 1800’s.

Coal is primarily used for generation of electricity, especially in China, India, and Africa.

As the number one importer of both crude oil and coal, China is the largest consumer of energy and producer of emissions in the world.

China, with 1,142 coal-fired power plants in operation as of July 2023, mainland China currently has a far greater number of coal-fired plants than any other country.
India comes in a distant second with 282 coal-fired plants.
The U.S.is third with 210 plants. Due to onerous regulations by the Biden Administration and the overreach of his BLM and EPA, approximately 170 of the remaining coal-fired plants in the U.S. are scheduled to be de-commissioned by 2030, and there are no plans to build any new coal-fired plants in the U.S. Meanwhile China is adding to its inventory of coal-fired power plants at a record rate.

During the first six months of 2023, China issued permits for the construction of approximately 50 new coal-fired power plants, an average of two per week. China currently has more than 300 coal-fired plants that are either under construction, permitted, or awaiting permitting. If all 300 plants are constructed, China’s inventory of coal-fired power plants will increase by more than 25%. Currently, China has six times more coal-fired power plants under construction than the rest of the World combined.

Officials within the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) offer a variety of reasons for the rapid reliance upon coal-fired power plants such as recent heat waves that have increased the demand for air conditioning. New coal-fired plants will simply serve as backup support for the undependable renewable sources of electricity generation from weather dependent wind and solar and during periods of intense electricity demand.

Given that China is also currently leading the world in the construction of renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar energy, China’s increased reliance upon coal contradicts the justifications offered by the CCP. Critics point out that most of the new coal-fired power plants are being constructed in locations that fail to support the justifications offered by the CCP, such as no reported instability of the grid or unreliability of renewable energy sources. Other critics indicate that the new coal-fired plants are being constructed in locations that are already powered almost entirely by coal as opposed to supposed unreliable renewable electricity generation sources.

Whatever stance is taken, while the wealthier developed nations are rapidly decreasing reliance upon coal-fired power plants by subsidizing wind and solar, China and other developing countries are moving even faster in the opposite direction, drastically increasing reliance upon coal that is abundant and affordable for their economies.

Hope is on the horizon. The landmark US Supreme Court Chevron case has taken much of the teeth out of overzealous federal bureaucrats. US Senator Steve Daines of Montana has proposed legislation to keep coal mines operational. The landslide victory of the incoming Trump administration including the coal friendly majority in the US Senate and House which are committed to energy independence, will likely reign in bureaucratic red tape, shortsighted energy hysteria from those who Senator Daines refers to as “Green Hallucinationists,” and put the American people first with clean, reliable and affordable electricity from the hard-working coal miners of the good old USofA! There is a new sheriff in town, especially DC town and the American Coal industry is proud to help wear that badge!

Please share this information with teachers, students, and friends to encourage Energy Literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

E-Mail Ronald Stein: Ronald.Stein@EnergyLiteracy.net

[Ronald Stein, P.E. is an engineer, columnist on energy literacy at America Out Loud NEWS, and advisor on energy literacy for the Heartland Institute and CFACT, and co-author of the Pulitzer Prize-nominated book “Clean Energy Exploitations.”

George Harris has served as Executive Director of Montana Coal Council since September 2022. He has a Master of Public Administration degree from BYU. He has served as Executive Budget Officer in Montana’s Governor’s Budget Office. He was the State Risk Manager and served as President of the National State Risk Managers Association.]