Billionaires Should Avoid Politics, Stop Complaining, and Pay More Taxes

 

     They have all the money and now they want all the influence too. They can buy it. Russian oligarch Ilan Shor paid money for votes in Moldovan elections and was rightly banned for interfering in elections. Elon Musk makes the same offer to unregistered voters, albeit a chance at winnings rather than cash upfront. Apparently, the DOJ informed Musk, the world’s richest man, that what he was doing might be illegal. I’m not sure how that will play out. Meanwhile, Jeff Bezos, the world’s second richest man, orders (or approves his editor’s decision after recommending) that the Washington Post not endorse Kamala Harris as was widely expected, and apparently within hours Blue Origin executives meet with Trump. Was Bezos considering potential new government contracts for Blue Origin if Trump were to win? A story in the Guardian, referenced below, suggests a deeper conspiracy, or a quid pro quo. In any case, the non-endorsement resulted in a lot of subscription cancelations, although some questioned the value of cancellation in protest. Thus far, two long-time columnists have resigned over the issue. Post associate editor Jonathan Capehart remains at the Post but called the non-endorsement ‘abominable’ in a video statement. Oddly, perhaps, a similar series of events played out at the LA Times, owned by billionaire Patrick Soon-Shiong. The LA Times also declined to endorse Harris as expected. An email asking for reasons for the decision has had no reply thus far. Columnists also resigned and the Trump campaign praised the decision.

     What I am trying to say is that our elections are being influenced in deliberate ways by the richest people in the world. How the influence will play out is still up in the air, but I think the real issue is why they are getting involved at all. These may be the two richest men in the world, but they get one vote in an election just like we do. In that sense we are equal. However, if they are out there throwing money around and declaring obvious against-the-grain non-endorsements, they are influencing votes in the way they want them to be. Are they not satisfied with their one vote? It’s bad enough we have to worry about the Russians, the Chinese, and the Iranians. Now, we have to worry about the billionaires too. Musk also owns X so both own media. Musk has used his ownership of X in a few ways to bend the rules for his own interests and now Bezos is doing the same. If they were not going to make an endorsement, they could have announced it many months ago instead of waiting till the last minute. The timing certainly seems to give away the intention, that Bezos favors Trump.

     Maybe we regular people, who also have one vote, but little chance of any influence, don’t wanna hear about billionaires throwing their weight around. I also don’t wanna hear them complaining about things, anything. They have billions of dollars, and they still manage to complain.

     The latest rumor about Musk is that he has been in regular contact with Vladimir Putin, as Trump apparently has been as well. I’m shocked at the audacity of both of them. While J.D. Vance tries to walk yet another thin line in saying Putin is an adversary but not an enemy and that negotiating with him will be necessary, Ukraine will not agree to Americans negotiating with Russia for them under terms Trump dictates. He seemed to suggest that Trump and Putin could somehow negotiate Ukraine’s fate.

     The Democratic National Convention had a weird billionaire moment when just after Bernie Sanders railed against the billionaire class as he does, he was followed by billionaire Democrat governor J.B. Pritzker. Oops!

     Indeed, billionaires are all over our politics and the spectrum. Michael Bloomberg, Trump, Tom Steyer, Musk, Bezos, and Peter Theil to name some.

     It just seems to make sense to tax the super-wealthy more, especially as it could help the less wealthy to survive better. Some psychologists say we have an innate sense of fairness. Perhaps the extreme inequality inherent in the quantitative definition of the term ‘billionaire’ evokes that sense. It might seem to be a grotesque example of excess and inequality when many have nothing.  

     The latest news from WAPO is that some prominent billionaires and CEOs are hedging their bets toward Trump by failing to endorse and saying positive things about him since they know Trump will use that against them if he were to get elected. It’s kind of gross and sad to see them line up to kiss his ass just like all the Republicans did after bashing him in the past. At a recent meeting of the Business Council, a group for CEOs only, they reported that “some attendees wound up discussing how to protect themselves and their companies if Trump wins the presidency next week and tries to use the power of the Oval Office against his perceived enemies, said the people, speaking on the condition of anonymity to describe private conversations.” Trump rather openly encourages business leaders to court his favor and fear his disfavor, as he routinely uses threats as part of his MO. They also note that according to Trump campaign advisors: “numerous executives have been trying to reach out to the former president’s team late in the race.” They advisors also said this: “I’ve told CEOs to engage as fast as possible because the clock is ticking … . If you’re somebody who has endorsed Harris, and we’ve never heard from you at any point until after the election, you’ve got an uphill battle,…” “People are back-channeling, looking at their networks — they’re talking to lobbyists to see what they can do to connect with the president and his team.” That all just sounds gross to me and not the way government should work. And here is another Trump team quote: “Bezos not endorsing Kamala Harris — I think that’s a $50 million endorsement for Trump. Not picking a horse is picking a horse.” One-time Trump team lawyer Alan Dershowitz said this: “In the last two weeks, there has been a greater recognition of the possibility of a Trump presidency, and I’ve spoken to several very wealthy people who are interested in hedging their bets and figuring out how to protect themselves.” “It’s a natural phenomenon of people who depend on government support for their wealth.” I guess it’s kiss ass or pay the price! Even Warren Buffet decided not to endorse Harris after endorsing Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Biden. Sure, maybe these endorsements are not really necessary and maybe endorsements should become more limited as we let the people decide, but to see all these big changes at the last minute as the super-rich try to suck up to the guy that wants to be authoritarian-in-chief is just yucky. The article also notes: “Trump said in a coffee table book published in September that he was watching Zuckerberg closely and that the executive would “spend the rest of his life in prison” if he did anything illegal in this year’s election.” Zuckerberg praised Trump as “badass” after the assassination attempt. It seems that fear of punishment and retribution has taken over the realm of billionaires and CEOs who are not (yet) MAGA enough.

 

 

References:

 

Bezos faces criticism after executives met with Trump on day of Post’s non-endorsement. Michael Sainato. The Guardian. October 27, 2024. Bezos faces criticism after executives met with Trump on day of Post’s non-endorsement

Second Post columnist resigns while others defend publication. Opinion by Greta Reich. Politico. October 27, 2024. Second Post columnist resigns while others defend publication

The 'abominable' non-endorsement decision by The Washington Post. Jonathan Capehart. October 27, 2024. The 'abominable' non-endorsement decision by The Washington Post | Watch

Ex-WaPo editor claims Jeff Bezos colluded with Trump to kill Harris endorsement: ‘Quid-pro-quo’. Anna Young. New York Post. October 26, 2024. Ex-WaPo editor claims Jeff Bezos colluded with Trump to kill Harris endorsement: ‘Quid-pro-quo’

Some billionaires, CEOs hedge bets as Trump vows retribution. Jeff Stein, Jacqueline Alemany, Josh Dawsey. Washington Post. October 28, 2024. Some billionaires, CEOs hedge bets as Trump vows retribution

Socialist Guterres Legitimizes BRICS Aims with Attendance at Summit: Summit Statements are a Bit Disturbing

 

     UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has noteworthy humanitarian credentials that are not in dispute. In addition, through his years of UN leadership, he has not been seen as overly ideological. However, his ideology does come through in many of his speeches and policy positions. Guterres was formerly the Prime Minister of Portugal and before he became UN leader was the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, where he oversaw the management of Syrian War refugees. He was also Secretary General of the Spanish Socialist Party and President of the Socialist International, a global association of political parties that seeks to establish democratic socialism, for six years. Even with his far-left-wing credentials, he was elected to a second term as UN Secretary-General.

     In 2021 Aaron Rhodes argued that Guterres, while not overly radical as Prime Minister, has been more ideological than his predecessors at the UN, Ban Ki Moon, and Kofi Annan, both diplomats. During the pandemic, he was accused of promoting global-scale economic redistribution. He unfairly criticized free markets and privatized health care as inadequate. He did little to help the UN’s already tainted reputation for its biases and much to promote it, one might argue. His seeming disdain for fossil fuel companies in his speeches and statements about climate change are consistent with an anti-business approach. Zachary Faria argued in 2020 in the Washington Examiner that the UN had become irrelevant and counterproductive, noting that it was “at odds with the values of freedom-loving countries for some time now, pandering not only to the Chinese Communist Party but also to Russia’s Vladimir Putin and terrorist regimes such as Iran.” That is a fair argument. Faria goes too far in suggesting that the U.S. should lower its contributions to the UN as it is still a vital global organization. Anti-Israel bias has long been noted at the UN and the presence and participation of nefarious countries with poor human rights records being overly tolerated and encouraged. The International Criminal Court, the International Court of Justice, the UN Human Rights Council, and some of the other UN bodies have been strongly criticized as biased as well.

     I was aghast when I heard Guterres was going to attend the latest BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia alongside Putin, Xi, Modi, Erdogan, Ramaphosa, Lula (he attended via video because of an injury), and the others. Putin railed on about de-dollarization and other ways for Russia to evade and weaken sanctions as he continued his anti-Western agenda for the group. Perhaps Guterres did help somewhat by saying that Russia was in violation of the U.N. Charter by invading Ukraine. We are all well aware of that and it does little to change anything except keep more of the members and prospective members from openly siding with the Kremlin. I agree with Zelensky that his attendance at the summit was a slap in the face to Ukraine and a way of legitimizing Russia’s goals. RBC Ukraine reports: “According to Ukraine's Permanent Representative to the UN, Serhiy Kyslytsia, Guterres' meeting with Putin undermined the UN's position on supporting the International Criminal Court (ICC).”

     Even though all BRICS members do not support Russia’s goals, they are certainly more willing to entertain them, and China and India are also willing to profit off of Russian sanctions and in the case of India avoid taking a position by citing their neutrality policy.

     Like it or not, economic sanctions are a means of soft warfare. They can be partially bypassed and evaded in various ways which contribute to black market economies and open up new ones. Cheating the system becomes more of a necessity. Without the ability to apply these sanctions, the alternatives become more militaristic. Our economic leverage is what little we have to beat back a war of aggression. Putin’s notion of an alternative economic system with a non-dollar currency may have some appeal to others in BRICS but that is not likely to manifest anytime soon. Putin wants a new non-Western world order to counter what he sees as a system rigged against him. Indeed, it is rigged against him simply because he has broken just about every rule and norm, by invading countries, killing dissidents, curbing free speech and human rights, committing war crimes, torture, massive amounts of global criminal activity, and so much more. The system was designed to prevent cheaters, and he cheats at everything. However, BRICS members, including sanctions beneficiaries China and India, had a much different take on G7 sanctions that they put out in a statement:

"We are deeply concerned about the disruptive effect of unlawful unilateral coercive measures, including illegal sanctions, on the world economy, international trade, and the achievement of the sustainable development goals."

     It was interesting perhaps that the statement brought up the UN sustainable development goals (SDGs), suggesting that sanctioning Russia was somehow disrupting them. In some ways, such as making emissions rise due to abandoning Russian pipelined gas and oil, it is disrupting them, but in others not so much, Guterres was quoted by Russian media: “I believe that all summits that bring countries together are very important, as they address global issues in the world.”  I wonder if he would feel the same if it were a summit of just Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea. Oddly, or perhaps not oddly at all, socialist policy positions about matters pertaining to Russia tend to align with Kremlin positions much better than non-socialist policy positions. After the beginning of the Ukraine invasion socialist groups around the world, including the Democratic Socialists of America proclaimed solidarity with Putin and the Kremlin’s position that NATO expansionism necessitated the invasion of Ukraine. Is Guterres a socialist in some kind of limited ideological solidarity with China (a neo-communist, neo-totalitarian state) and Russia (a former communist state that is now an authoritarian neo-totalitarian state)?

The summit put out a statement about the need for an alternative financial system, no doubt at the behest of Russia and Iran in particular:

"We underscore the need to reform the current international financial architecture to meet the global financial challenges including global economic governance to make the international financial architecture more inclusive and just."

     In this case, I would interpret ‘inclusive and just’ to mean without sanctions against Russia and Iran. The group also put out a statement specifically condemning Israeli actions in the Middle East in Gaza and Lebanon, without mentioning Hamas, Hezbollah, or Iran. That was also surprising to me. My guess is that Turkiye and Iran were most in favor of such a statement. South Africa has also been vocal at the UN in condemning Israeli actions. In the Israeli case, the statement called for an immediate ceasing of Israeli hostilities. In the case of Ukraine, the statement was notably less specific and more neutral, calling on both parties to adhere to the UN Charter. I am not sure how BRICS statements get approved, but it is not looking good that the more democratic members of the club like Brazil, South Africa, and India will be able to rein in the extremist goals of Russia, Iran, and in some cases China. Meanwhile, Putin and company are looking forward to expanding the club with 30 countries currently hoping to join.

     Russia now has strong reciprocal military partnerships with pariah countries Iran and North Korea. It has economic and sanctions evasion partnerships with Iran, Venezuela, China, India, and Greek and UAE shipping companies. I just read a story today about an Indian company in Mumbai exporting sanctioned Nvidia AI chips to Russia. It has been especially difficult to keep such 'dual-use' technology out of Russia. India and China are the biggest facilitators. Russia and China are developing what may well become one of the largest economic cooperation groups in the world with BRICS. I don’t want to live in a world where countries that break common sense international rules, invade countries and cheat in many endeavors are running the world’s premier economic and trade systems. I want a world that is free and fair, not one where human rights and free speech are unprotected and one where criminality and corruption pervade everything, and you should too.

 

References:

 

Antonio Guterres Gets Another UN Term to Promote Socialism. Aaron Rhodes. Real Clear Markets. June 23, 2021. Antonio Guterres Gets Another UN Term to Promote Socialism | RealClearMarkets

UN boss thinks socialism will fix the world’s problems. He’s wrong. Zachary Faria. Washington Examiner. UN boss thinks socialism will fix the world’s problems. He’s wrong - Washington Examiner

Guterres praises BRICS summit in Russia, captivated by Kazan Kremlin. Vladyslava Kovalenko. RBC Ukraine. October 27, 2024. Guterres praises BRICS summit in Russia, captivated by Kazan Kremlin

BRICS summit: Key takeaways from the Kazan declaration. Reuters. October 24, 2024. BRICS summit: Key takeaways from the Kazan declaration | Reuters

What happened at the BRICS summit? Reuters. October 24, 2024. What happened at the BRICS summit? | Reuters

How a Mumbai Drugmaker Is Helping Putin Get Nvidia AI Chips. Andy Lin (News), Shruti Srivastava, Advait Palepu and Viktoria Dendrinou. Bloomberg, October 7, 2024. How a Mumbai Drugmaker Is Helping Putin Get Nvidia AI Chips

 

 

Form Energy’s Long-Duration Iron-Air Battery System: Planned Deployments and Manufacturing Expansion

 

     Long-duration energy storage is still one of the missing links for developing reliable clean electricity grid systems. Form Energy believes they have a solution with their iron-air battery system that can provide over 100 hours of energy storage. This would be ideal for long power outages and, more frequently, to store energy in the winter when solar output is lower and has a shorter daily generation period. It can also help where wind output varies by season. The company believes it can provide long-duration energy storage at a price comparable to alternatives, including thermal power plants. Of course, that remains to be seen.

 

     Long-duration energy storage is a different application than the common short-duration energy storage usually provided by utility-scale Li-ion batteries, which can provide energy for up to 4 or 5 hours at a time. Thus, Form’s iron-air battery can provide 25 times the storage time as LI-ion batteries. It can also be complementary to Li-ion batteries in grid applications.

 

     Form Energy’s battery uses powdered iron, water, and air to exchange energy. All of those components are readily available and inexpensive. There is less reliance on mining and processing for the materials as there is with Li-ion and other battery chemistries. Iron is the most mined metal and one of the most available and least expensive metals.

     The process for Form’s battery is known as ‘reverse rusting.’ Actually. That is the process for charging the battery. The iron is oxidized, or rusted, during the discharging part of the cycle and reduced, or reverse rusted, during the charging part of cycle.

 

     Iron-air batteries have been researched since the 1970s. Form began working on theirs in 2017. They didn’t have to prove the technology but to prove that they can control the reactions in such a way that they can be adequately repeatable and reliable, or as they say it: “we have reinvented and optimized the iron-air battery for the electric grid,” or as Form told Canary Media in 2021: “What we’re doing is optimizing a technology that had never been commercialized before.” An article in Fast Company describes the battery cycle in a bit more detail:

 

“The finished product is a 40-foot shipping container filled with groups of battery cells. Inside the cells, a plate of iron is submerged in water with dissolved salts. When the battery discharges, it pulls in oxygen and the iron starts to rust over the course of 100 hours. When it charges, the oxygen is removed from the iron so it goes back to unrusted metal. The basic materials are cheap. There’s another advantage: unlike lithium-ion batteries, these batteries don’t risk catching on fire.”

 

     Form Energy’s website describes the deployment configurations

 

“Each individual battery module is about the size of a side-by-side washer/dryer set and contains a stack of approximately 50 one meter-tall cells.”

 

“These battery modules are grouped together in environmentally protected enclosures. Hundreds of these enclosures are grouped together in modular megawatt-scale power blocks. Depending on the system size, tens to hundreds of these power blocks will be connected to the electricity grid. For scale, in its least dense configuration, a one megawatt system comprises half an acre of land. Higher density configurations would achieve >3 MW/acre.”

 

     These statements confirm two issues related to cost: Land use is considerable. At 3MW/acre, it is about one-third of utility-scale solar which is conservatively estimated at 10MW/acre. That is still a substantial land footprint. In addition to the land footprint, the materials footprint is also quite substantial. The sheer size of deployments means vast amounts of materials to build the cells and enclosure. Both of these factors raise costs significantly.

 

     Form Energy was a start-up funded in-part by Bill Gates-backed Breakthrough Energy Ventures. In 2020 the company acquired the zinc-air battery patents of defunct company Fluidic Energy. Those zinc-air batteries were deployed often in remote solar microgrids. Form used the zinc-air tech to develop a better iron-air tech, calling iron the “world’s best air cathode.” The iron that Form’s battery uses can be easily supplied by the steel industry. This is one reason why partnering with the steel industry has been a good idea. In 2021 ArcelorMittal, one of the world’s leading iron ore producers, is an early investor. ArcelorMittal will also be a supplier of iron materials developed jointly with Form for use in the batteries.

 

     The company announced in October 2024 that it obtained $405 million in financing to expand its manufacturing facility in Weirton, WV. This will expand the size of the existing 550,000-square-foot facility by 300,000 square feet. Construction began in May 2023 for the original facility and was completed a year later, considered to be a fast timeline. The company announced a collaboration with GE Vernova for manufacturing and engineering expertise. GE Vernova will provide guidance on manufacturing, supply chain operations, financing, and sourcing.  By 2028, they expect to have a 1 million square foot facility employing 750 people with an annual production capacity of 500MW/50GWh. That is not as many as the 13,000 that were employed at Weirton Steel at its peak, but it is a positive development for the area. I grew up in a steel mill town just a few miles down the Ohio River from here. The facility is built on the 55-acre site of the former Weirton Steel Works. Some of the works’ buildings will be retained for cultural and historical purposes and some will be utilized by Form. It hopes to have the expansion fully constructed and operational by the end of 2025. The facility began trial production earlier this year and expects to begin commercial production before the end of 2024.

 

     Form has announced about 14GWh of projects to date. They broke ground on their first pilot deployment, a 1.5 MW/150 MWh project developed in partnership with Minnesota utility Great River Energy. It is expected to begin operations by the end of 2025.

 

     Utility Dive summarizes form Energy’s current projects, sizes, and timelines:

 

• A memorandum of understanding with Puget Sound Energy to explore a potential 10-MW/1-GWh deployment in its service territory as soon as the end of 2026;
• A 5-MW/500-MWh project, funded in part by a $30 million grant from the California Energy Commission, at a Pacific Gas & Electric site in northern California;
• A 10 MW/1-GWh demonstration project in New York, funded in part by a $12 million grant from the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority;
• A self-developed deployment of 85 MW/8.5 GWh in rural Maine, funded in part by a $147 million grant from the U.S. Department of Energy; and
• A partnership with Xcel Energy’s Minnesota subsidiary for a 10 MW/1-GWh deployment paired with up to 710 MW of solar.

     Form announced in 2021 that they think they can build their systems at $20/kWh, which would be very competitive with power plants. I am not sure if they are still using this estimate. If they could do it, it would be great, but I must admit I am skeptical. The company developed a grid modeling toolkit for grid planners that seeks to incorporate long-duration storage. The software is called Formware and aims to optimize the value of long-duration storage on more decarbonized grids. This optimization involves integrating long-term storage with generation and short-term storage. I wonder if this could also be used with pumped hydro, which currently makes up something like 98% of deployed long-duration storage.  

 

“Form’s internal analytics predict that over the next decade, achieving Form’s cost and performance targets will unlock tens of gigawatts of demand for multi-day storage in the U.S. and accelerate the country’s trajectory towards a more reliable and resilient, clean electric grid. At such levels of deployment, Form’s technology will catalyze billions of dollars in savings to American electricity consumers.”

 

 

 

References:

 

Iron-air battery developer Form Energy raises $405M, announces collaboration with GE Vernova. Brian Martucci. Utility Dive. October 22, 2024. Iron-air battery developer Form Energy raises $405M, announces collaboration with GE Vernova | Utility Dive

Form Energy Begins Expansion of Form Factory 1 to Increase Manufacturing Capacity. Form Energy. October 14, 2024. Form Energy Begins Expansion of Form Factory 1 to Increase Manufacturing Capacity | Form Energy

Form Energy Secures $405M in Series F Financing to Expand Iron-Air Battery Business and Operations. Form Energy. October 9, 2024. Form Energy Secures $405M in Series F Financing to Expand Iron-Air Battery Business and Operations | Form Energy

Form Energy’s $20/kWh, 100-hour iron-air battery could be a ‘substantial breakthrough’. July 26, 2021. Jason Plautz. Utility Dive. July 26, 2021. Form Energy's $20/kWh, 100-hour iron-air battery could be a 'substantial breakthrough' | Utility Dive

Stealthy storage contender Form Energy reveals secret formula: Iron and air. Julian Spector. Canary Media. July 23, 2021. Stealthy storage contender Form Energy reveals secret… | Canary Media

Battery Technology: Multi-day storage, the pathway to a clean, reliable and secure grid. Form Energy. Battery Technology | Form Energy

Grids Modeling Toolkit: Pioneering new grid modeling tools for a clean energy future. Form Energy. Grid Modeling Toolkit | Form Energy

In West Virginia, a former steel mill is now home to a cutting-edge battery plant. Adele Peters. Fast Company. October 25, 2024. Aa former West Virginia steel mill is now home to a cutting-edge battery plant - Fast Company

Form Energy’s Utility-Sized Battery Can Run for Four Days. Bloomberg. October 22, 2024. Form Energy’s Utility-Sized Battery Can Run for Four Days - Bloomberg

The True Land Footprint of Solar Energy. Great Plains Institute. September 14, 2021. The True Land Footprint of Solar Energy - Great Plains Institute (betterenergy.org)

 

Swapping EV Batteries: Ample’s New Automated Swap Model Can Benefit Urban Drivers and Fleets

     Battery swapping means pulling into a battery swapping station and having your mostly discharged battery replaced with a fully charged battery within minutes. Ample is the company leading battery swapping technology. Their business model involves selling a subscription for battery replacement when needed. An advantage of this is that when you buy the EV, you don’t pay for the battery, which can significantly reduce the purchase cost of the EV. You would essentially rent the battery from Ample.

     Ample claims their swapping stations can be constructed and be operational quickly, in about three days. Auto Travel World writes:

“Battery swapping also has implications for the entire lifecycle of EV batteries. With a centralized system for charging and monitoring, batteries can be charged more efficiently, prolonging their lifespan. This improved management reduces waste and enhances the overall sustainability of batteries as resources are used more effectively. The knowledge and monitoring of battery health can contribute to a circular economy where batteries are reused and recycled more efficiently.”

     The swapping process is fully automated. A driver can initiate the swap with an app, pull into a station, and park while the battery is swapped within minutes. Ample utilizes a modular battery design that can bank together so an EV with a bigger battery can simply have more modules than one with a smaller one. They claim their model can be used for any EV, any size, and any automaker.

     Battery swapping would be especially good for fleet vehicles such as ride-sharing vehicles and delivery services. It could also be effective in urban areas where charging infrastructure may be inadequate and especially where home charging is not available, such as where people live in apartments without dedicated parking spots.

     There may also be environmental advantages in terms of carbon emissions. The battery is essentially decoupled from the vehicle so that the batteries that are “swapped in” may be charged with renewable energy when it is most available and with the cheapest electricity.

“Ample's modular approach encourages a movement towards a common battery architecture, which could pave the way for broader adoption. As more automakers recognize the benefits, we may see a shift towards compatibility that could revolutionize the industry.”

     If a person can simply drive into a station and have their battery swapped in five minutes they would not be worried about range and “range anxiety” can become a thing of the past. Worrying about replacing a degrading battery can also become a thing of the past, or as Ample states it:

“Ample eliminates the biggest driver for loss of residual value in EVs: battery degradation.”

     Ample is currently partnering with automakers, ride-sharing companies, and fleets to advance the technology. According to Ample’s website:

“Ample can easily work with any EV design. It can act as a drop-in replacement for the original battery design. We have already integrated into many existing platforms by working closely with automakers. The process of getting a new car on the Ample platform takes 2-3 months. Your EV can still support the original battery since the same vehicle design can support both offerings.”

     Another advantage of battery swapping is that you can get newer and better batteries without having to buy a new car. Thus, one could always access the most advanced battery tech available. Yet another advantage is that battery recycling and reuse can be optimized as companies like Ample can determine when a battery is no longer ideal for the specific requirements of an EV and quickly move it to another application in a seamless manner.

     In summary, this battery swapping model offers several advantages and convenience for fleets, automakers, and drivers. Aside from the time it takes (2 to 3 months) to put each car model on the Ample platform, this battery swapping idea looks to be a very good model for optimizing EV usage for all involved.

 

 

References:

Revolutionizing EV Charging: The Future of Battery Swapping. Elijah Patel. Auto Travel World. September 27, 2024. Revolutionizing EV Charging: The Future of Battery Swapping (msn.com)

Ample (website). Homepage | Ample

India’s Plan to Nearly Double Natural Gas Pipeline Capacity Buildout

 

     India is a developing country with a large population and a growing demand for all forms of energy that will continue into the future. Coal, oil, and natural gas and their infrastructure are very much in demand. As I noted recently in a post about India’s coal mine methane emissions, India is planning to build new mines, including more underground mines, and thus India’s greenhouse gas emissions are expected to increase. Coal-fired plants and gas-fired plants are being built and solar panels and wind turbines are being deployed. Oil and gas drilling is ongoing. All of these energy sources are supporting a fast-growing economy.

“According to predictions of the Indian Ministry of Finance, this year the Indian economics is expected to grow by 7.5%, that will make it the world’s third-largest and the world’s fastest growing economy.”

     According to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the government is ready to invest at least $67 billion in the next five to six years to develop the domestic natural gas sector. A big part of this investment will be investment in pipelines. India has about 14,000 miles of natural gas pipelines and India currently has 13,331 miles of pipeline projects planned or under construction. This would basically double the country’s pipeline capacity. This is expected to increase the energy share of natural gas in India from 6% to 15%. Distribution pipelines in rural areas are also expected to be built to give more access to residential consumers.

     Rystad Energy projects India’s natural gas demand to nearly double by 2040 with consistent demand growth. Middle Eastern LNG imports have grown in recent years and are expected to continue to grow. The fertilizer, refining, and petrochemical industries are growing as is the city gas distribution (CGD) network. India still imports fertilizer but expects to increase domestic urea fertilizer output which uses natural gas as a feedstock. They note:

 

“India’s CGD network has expanded rapidly in recent years, with the number of CNG stations rising more than fivefold since 2015 to 5,710 by April of last year and the number of {piped natural gas} PNG connections more than quadrupling to 12 million over the same period."

     India and China have benefited from the availability of cheap Russian oil via Ukraine war sanctions. India imports about 50% of its gas but also has significant domestic reserves both onshore and offshore. China is also building out its natural gas network in a similar way.

The effort in India is known Nation One Gas Grid scheme. India is also building long and large transmission pipelines including the 1180-mile (1900-km) Jagdishpur-Haldia Phase II pipeline, which is being built by state-owned Gas Authority of India Limited (GAIL), and the 1139-mile (1834 km) Mehsana–Bhatinda pipeline. Areas in the north and northeast of the country, and in Kashmir and Ladakh are expected to be networked as well.

     India is also investing to replace outdated existing pipeline infrastructure. That should also help decrease total leakage. India is also building out oil pipelines. According to Pipeline & Gas Journal:

 

“According to a recent study of Global Energy Monitor, India is constructing 742 miles (1,630 km) of oil transmission pipelines currently, ranking second globally in the pipelines under construction category.” 

 

“Among the major projects are the 742-mile (1,630-km) Paradip Numaligarh Crude Pipeline (that will connect two Indian major eastern states Odisha and Assam) and (1,194-km) New Mundra–Panipat Oil Pipeline, which will connect the Indian most Western state Gujarat and its northern part in the state of Haryana.” 

 

“Both pipelines will be among the longest oil pipelines in the world after their commissioning. Overall, according to India Infrastructure Research, at least 15 oil pipeline projects are currently implemented within the country. Most of those are operated by such local majors as Indian Oil Corporation Limited (IOCL) and Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (HPCL).” 

 

     India is also planning to supply oil and natural gas to neighboring countries. The India-Bangladesh Friendship Pipeline (IBFP) which is designed to transport diesel from India to Bangladesh is currently suspended due to political instability in Bangladesh. Another natural gas pipeline is expected to connect to Bangladesh and Myanmar, potentially accessing Myanmar’s 22.5TCF of natural gas reserves. India expects to compete with China and hopes to create a thriving Northeast Asian oil & gas hub.

 

 

References:

 

India Sets $67 Billion Goal to Expand Gas Pipeline Network by 9,630 Miles. Pipeline & Gas Journal. October 2024, Vol. 251, No. 10. India Sets $67 Billion Goal to Expand Gas Pipeline Network by 9,630 Miles | Pipeline and Gas Journal (pgjonline.com)

Natural Gas Pipelines Network in India - As on 31.03.2023. PNGRB. Government of India. NGPL-08062023.pdf (pngrb.gov.in)

India’s domestic gas demand to double by 2040, local production falls short. Kartik Selvaraju, Kaushal Ramesh, Allison Anne Samuel, and Kartik Selvaraju. Rystad Energy. October 23, 2024. India’s domestic gas demand to double by 2040, local production falls short (rystadenergy.com)

 

 

South Korea’s East Sea Oil & Gas Exploration Project in the Ulleung Basin: Reserves Yet to Be Confirmed but Could Be Big

     South Korea imports nearly all of its oil and gas. Domestic oil production is just 0.8% of total consumption and domestic natural gas production is just 0.1% of total consumption, according to 2021 data analyzed by the IEA.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration gives some data for the South Korean energy mix and sources, shown below.

      This extreme dependency on imports for oil and gas makes the thought of domestic resource discoveries potentially game-changing. The country’s oil and gas are produced offshore in the East Sea. New geophysical evaluations suggest that there may be larger fields available to tap in that region and that is what the country expects to do. The main area of potential is the Ulleung Basin in the East Sea/Sea of Japan, between Korea and Japan. The area has long been a region of interest for the production of gas hydrates but the technology to produce them has not yet been developed. The targeted area is off Yeongil Bay in Pohang, North Gyeongsang Province. According to the Korean Herald:

“Korea discovered its first gas field in the East Sea in 1998. The Korea National Oil Corp. began the commercial production of the gas field between 2004 and 2010, posting a revenue of 2.6 trillion won {about $1.9 billion) during the period.”

     The South Korean government led by President Yoon Suk Yeol announced in June 2024 that it will pursue exploratory drilling on this promising block in the East Sea. The new drilling will take place in waters over 600 meters deep and has the potential to produce up to 14 billion barrels of oil equivalent. Act-Geo, a top global deep-sea technology consultancy based in the US, pegged the resource potential between 3.5 and 14 billion barrels equivalent. The first round of exploratory drilling will consist of five wells costing up to $73 million each. Global oil companies are taking interest according to officials at the Industry Ministry. The first well is expected to be spudded by the end of this year and results are expected to be reported in the second quarter of 2025. If the reserves are confirmed it will still take time for full project development with 2035 given as a target date. That is a long time from now but deepwater projects commonly have timelines of about a decade. The reserve estimates are expected to be 75% natural gas and 25% oil.

     In October 2024 the Korea National Oil Corp (KNOC) named S&P Global as the adviser for the project. They will assist in attracting investment for the project. It was also reported that ExxonMobil, Saudi Aramco and Italy's Eni have expressed interest in the project. KNOC also announced that Schlumberger will provide mudlogging services “to analyze the rock and gas composition.”

“The state-run oil company earlier said it has found seven potential locations for oil and gas reserves, with an estimated success rate of around 20 percent, meaning 1 out of every 5 holes drilled would be successful.”

     According to KNOC’s website:

“Since KNOC had been established in 1979, it began working on the shelves continuously and has acquired 116,549 L-㎞ of 2D seismic data and 7,519 ㎢ of 3D seismic data and has drilled 47 wells so far.”

“Block 6-1 was first explored by Royal Dutch Shell Oil in 1971. The company drilled a first exploratory well in offshore of Korea, although not tested, encountered a number of gas shows. KNOC has paid attention to Block 6-1 after 1983. Since then, it has conducted numerous seismic surveys and 24 wells drilling campaigns. These efforts resulted in thirteen minor discoveries of gas and two major discoveries of economically producible gas reserves in 1998, 2005 as described above (see Donghae-1, Donghae-2 section below for further information).”

“KNOC and Woodside Energy Limited which hold a 50% working interest, respectively signed the concession contract with Korea’s Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy(MOTIE) to explore deepwater blocks, Block 6-1 North and Block 8, in 2007. During 10 years contracting period, two exploration wells, Jujak-1 and Hongge-1 were drilled in 2012 and 2015, respectively and confirmed the presence of gas in deepwater region. KNOC and Woodside started to explore same area again in 2019 with a new concession contract and acquired new 3D seismic data during the 1st exploration period. Woodside decided not to enter the 2nd exploration period and KNOC took over their working interest and operatorship. Now KNOC is soley operating the project in the 2nd exploration period.”

     If the reserves predicted are at the high end, they could result in meeting 29 years of the country’s natural gas demand and 4 years of its oil demand.

Ulleung Basin Geology

     Geologically, the Ulleung Basin is a Neogene back-arc basin influenced by the motion of three tectonic plates. A thick sequence of sedimentary clastic rocks has been deposited in the basin. Despite seismic surveys, the tectonic history of the basin is not well understood and there is some disagreement about it. Back arc basins in general are not well understood. A 2019 paper in Basin Research divides the tectonic history of the Ulleung Basin into four stages:

“In Stage 1 (late Oligocene through early Miocene), syn-rift sediment supplied to the basin was restricted to the southern base-of-slope, whereas the northern distal part of the basin was dominated by volcanic sills and lava flows derived from initial rifting-related volcanism. In Stage 2 (late early Miocene through middle Miocene), volcanic extrusion occurred through post-rift, chain volcanism in the earliest time, followed by hemipelagic and turbidite sedimentation in a quiescent open marine setting. In Stage 3 (late middle Miocene through late Miocene), compressional activity was predominant throughout the Ulleung Basin, resulting in regional uplift and sub-aerial erosion/denudation of the southern shelf of the basin, which provided enormous volumes of sediment into the basin through mass transport processes. In Stage 4 (early Pliocene through present), although the degree of tectonic stress decreased significantly, mass movement was still generated by sea-level fluctuations as well as compressional tectonic movement, resulting in stacked mass transport deposits along the southern basin margin.”

     The basin experienced periods of rifting, basin subsidence, terrigenous deposition, and later compressional tectonics resulting in thrust faulting and folding. According to a 2002 paper in Geosciences Journal:

“The sequential effects of this tectonic event include local and regional angular unconformities, progradation-dominant shelf-margin depositional system and frequent triggering of large-scale mass-failures in front of the thrust belt. Since the early Pliocene, the basin has progressively subsided again, forming aggradation-dominant shelf-slope system.”

 

 

References:

 

Korea bets big on gas, oil prospects in East Sea: Buried natural resources could be worth over $1.6tr: industry minister. Kan Hyeong-woo. Korea Herald. June 3, 2024. Korea bets big on gas, oil prospects in East Sea (koreaherald.com)

S. Korea picks Schlumberger to analyze rock, gas in East Sea project. Kang Yoon-seung. Yonhap News English. October 19, 2024. S. Korea picks Schlumberger to analyze rock, gas in East Sea project (msn.com)

'Major global oil companies interested in joining East Sea oil, gas field. Baek Byung-yeul. The Korea Times. June 19, 2024. 'Major global oil companies interested in joining East Sea oil, gas field project' - The Korea Times

S. Korea picks adviser for oil, gas exploration in East Sea. Yonhap. Korea Herald. October 15, 2024. S. Korea picks adviser for oil, gas exploration in East Sea (koreaherald.com)

E & P. worldwide. Korea. Korean National Oil Corporation. Korea National Oil Corporation (knoc.co.kr)

Tectonostratigraphic framework and depositional history of the deepwater Ulleung Basin, East Sea/Sea of Japan. Kyoung-Jin Kim, Dong-Geun Yoo, Nyeon-Keon Kang, Bo-Yeon Yi. July 2019. Basin Research. Tectonostratigraphic framework and depositional history of the deepwater Ulleung Basin, East Sea/Sea of Japan - Kim - 2020 - Basin Research - Wiley Online Library

Tectonic history of Ulleung basin margin, East Sea (Sea of Japan). S. K. Chough; E. Barg. Geology (1987) 15 (1): 45–48. Tectonic history of Ulleung basin margin, East Sea (Sea of Japan) | Geology | GeoScienceWorld

Evolution of sedimentary basin in the southwestern Ulleung Basin margin: Sequence stratigraphy and geologic structures. S. H. Yoon, S. J. Park, and S. K. Chough. January 2002. Geosciences Journal 6(2):149-159. Evolution of sedimentary basin in the southwestern Ulleung Basin margin: Sequence stratigraphy and geologic structures (researchgate.net)

Country Analysis Brief: South Korea. Last Updated: April 2023. Next Update: February 2025. Energy Information Administration. Country Analysis Brief: (eia.gov)

Korea. Oil. International Energy Agency. Korea - Countries & Regions - IEA

Korea. Natural Gas. International Energy Agency. Korea - Countries & Regions - IEA

 

Mexico’s Energy Challenges and Opportunities: Sheinbaum, Pemex, and the Federal Electricity Commission (CFE)

 

     Mexico’s newly elected President Gloria Sheinbaum took office on October 1. Sheinbaum has energy plans mainly continued from her predecessor. These include more government control of the national oil company Pemex, which is suffering from a pretty severe debt of $100 billion and provider debt of $20 billion. She also plans more government control of the Federal Electricity Commission (CFE). These will be reclassified as public companies. However, critics argue that this will discourage private investment at a time when the country, especially the energy and electricity sectors is starving for it. Underinvestment has plagued both oil & gas and electricity. The electricity transmission sector is especially in need of investment.

     In addition to the debt and underinvestment woes, Sheinbaum is planning an ambitious clean energy push for the electricity sector. Mexico’s energy mix currently includes 24% of it being derived from renewables, mostly hydropower. Her goal is to increase that to 45% by 2030. I would rate that as highly unlikely, especially with wind and solar alone.

     Electricity by energy sources, primary energy data, and other Mexican energy stats are shown below.

 

     Mexico also suffers from a ballooning deficit. Sheinbaum has said that Pemex will decrease its E&P spending, which may affect future oil & gas production. The spending cuts of about $1.35 billion through the end of 2024 are expected to help the company preserve capital. Propping up Pemex is important for Mexico but poor management at the company is likely one of the real issues that needs to be addressed. Pemex currently produces 1.5 million Bbls/day of crude oil (1.8 million bpd if condensate is included) and the goal is to maintain that rate. However, wells decline, and investment will be needed to maintain that production.

 

     An NREL report from April 2022 calls Mexico a ‘Clean Energy Powerhouse.’ The report had scenarios where Mexico’s clean energy production increased to between 27% and 34% of the electricity mix by the end of 2024, but they seem to be behind that trajectory or maybe near the low end of it, depending on how it is measured.

 

     Mexico has abundant wind and solar resources. These will no doubt increase. However, the usual grid integration challenges will come along with that increase, including the need for more transmission. The country has some geothermal power production and that could eventually double or triple even though the total additions possible, about 2.5 GW won’t be all that significant and would be very expensive. Most of Mexico’s hydroelectric power is tapped but the report gives about 1.2 GW potential in repowering some hydro facilities. Geographically, solar resources are available throughout the country, but the others are constrained to certain areas of the country as the graphic below shows.

 

     There is no doubt that Mexico will continue to import significant quantities of inexpensive natural gas from the U.S. in order to power its grid and industries. S&P Global reported in November 2023 that Mexico was importing 5.7 BCF/day of natural gas, all from Texas. This gas, mostly from the Permian Basin Waha Hub is low-cost now, but they expect some price increases when new U.S. LNG projects are online in 2025 and beyond. In 2023, this made up 68% of Mexico’s natural gas and they expect that to increase somewhat to 79% by 2050. Mexico does have some onshore production possibilities, particularly in the extension of the Eagle Ford shale play, but has been very reluctant to develop due to perceived envornmental threats from fracking, the lack of domestic infrastructure, and a domestic industry that is not set up for shale gas production via fracking. They also report that 10 new natural gas power plants adding to 6.5 GW in capacity, now under construction and expected to be online in 2027 will require an additional 1 BCF/day of natural gas, presumably most or all of coming it from the U.S. The Mexican government also announced up to seven private LNG export terminals that would export around 50 million mt/year of gas. That gas also would likely come from the U.S. Thus, the increases in gas imports from the U.S. may come sooner rather than later. Those LNG projects also need more pipeline infrastructure and some think most of them won’t get built. AMLO’s government has been accused of poor energy planning. As evidence of this, they noted:

 

“That has led to the country not fully utilizing its own production, which in many cases has led state oil company Pemex to flare or burn much-needed gas. According to the upstream regulator CNH, Pemex flared as much as 12 Bcf/d during a small period in 2023 at one of its new fields because it did not expect output to be so high and lacked infrastructure to utilize it.”

 

     They also summarized Mexico’s domestic natural gas production:

 

“Currently, of the roughly 4 Bcf/d of natural gas produced in the country, 1 Bcf is unusable because of the high nitrogen content and around 2 Bcf is used by Pemex in its upstream operations, leaving only 1 Bcf/d available for the market, panelists said. In addition, lack of a distribution infrastructure makes it even harder to access that available gas.”

 

     Thus, as the article title notes, Mexico is dependent on the U.S. for natural gas, which is the major energy source for its power grid.

 

 

References:

 

Mexico set for energy shake-up as Sheinbaum rewrites the rules. Alek Buttermann. Intellinews. October 21, 2024. Mexico set for energy shake-up as Sheinbaum rewrites the rules (msn.com)

Pemex Delays Projects, Targets $1.35 Billion in Savings. Pipeline & Gas Journal. October 20, 2024. Pemex Delays Projects, Targets $1.35 Billion in Savings | Pipeline and Gas Journal (pgjonline.com)

Mexico: Energy Country Profile. Hannah Ritchie and Max Roser. Our World in Data. Mexico: Energy Country Profile - Our World in Data

Mexico: North American Clean Energy Powerhouse. Clean Energy Report. U.S. Dept. of Energy. National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL). April 2022. Mexico Clean Energy Report (nrel.gov)

Mexico's dependency on US gas to continue but costs could rise: panelists. S&P Global. November 15, 2023. Mexico's dependency on US gas to continue but costs could rise: panelists | S&P Global Commodity Insights (spglobal.com)