Wyoming Soda Ash Mines and Tata Chemicals’ Plan to Power Mining with Nuclear Micro-Reactors

 

     The U.S. is the undisputed king of soda ash deposits. Soda ash is sodium carbonate, (NA2CO3), (as distinguished from sodium bicarbonate, or baking soda). The Green River area of Wyoming hosts the largest soda ash deposits in the world and the U.S. is estimated to have 92% of global soda ash reserves. By some accounts, this deposit adds up to 2000 years of supply. Soda ash can also be manufactured with limestone and salt (NaCl) which are abundant, but the process is more costly and environmentally destructive than mining. China is the largest manufacturer. New mines are being developed in the Green River area. The mineral ore from which soda ash is derived is known as trona. Trona ore is filtered, concentrated, crystallized, and dried into soda ash, a white powder. The Wyoming deposit is in Sweetwater County. This deposit supplies 90% of the soda ash used in the U.S. The vast underground mines are 1600 ft below the surface and equipped with all amenities for the workers. According to the Wyoming Mining Association:

“This mineral is Wyoming’s top export and is shipped to markets around the globe.  Wyoming mines produced over 17.4 million tons of trona and employed 2,225 people in 2018.”

     There are some trona mines in California as well. Soda ash can also be extracted from sodium-rich brines, typically in solution-mining operations where mines are flooded. Some information, data, statistics, and mining depictions are shown below.  

     Soda ash is used in the manufacture of baking soda (sodium bicarbonate, although it is also mined from nahcolite ore) glass, soaps and detergents, water purifiers, insulation, flue gas desulfurization equipment, paper and more. Soda ash is desirable as a source of alkalinity has a pH of 11.6. It is considered to be a weak base that separates in solution into sodium and carbonate ions. It is used to raise pH in swimming pools. The Wyoming Mining Association notes:

“Glass making consumes about half of the soda ash, followed by the chemical industry, which uses about a quarter of the output. Other uses include soap, paper manufacturing, and water treatment, and all baking soda comes from soda ash, which means you probably have a box of Wyoming trona product in your kitchen.”

     They also note that we eat this Wyoming rock quite often since it is used to make both baking soda and baking powder:

“Baking soda and baking powder both come from soda ash, so most Americans have a product of Wyoming trona right in their own kitchens. These two common household substances are important ingredients for making bread, cookies, cakes, and other baked foods. You eat this Wyoming rock every time you bite into a sandwich, peanut butter cookie, or chocolate cake.”

     New mines are in progress for the Wyoming deposit. Due to NEPA requirements for environmental impact statements, which take 4 years or more on average, 8 years is a common timeframe between planning and realization. WE Soda Ltd., a subsidiary of British-based Ciner Resources company announced plans in 2022 for their Project West mine, hoping to be in production in 2030. Project West is expected to cost $2.6 billion. They plan to power a portion of the mine with renewable energy and recycle a portion of the water used in processes. One problem for the company is the lack of workers' housing in the region.

     The Green River Basin is a lacustrine basin, or a large inland lake that eventually dried up and was filled with sediment. The Wyoming Mining Association describes the geology and origin of the trona deposits:

“The deposition of trona in Wyoming started about 50-60 million years ago during the Eocene Age in the Wilkins Peak Member of the Green River Formation. A large freshwater lake, Lake Gosiute, covered an estimated 15,000 square miles in a basin in southwestern Wyoming. The lake was fairly shallow and evaporated rapidly and repeatedly creating a climate that changed back and forth between humid and arid, trapping the once abundant life.”

“All the minerals and mud settled in the bottom of the lake and sodium, alkaline and bicarbonate, were transported to the lake by runoff water. The mixture of all these elements formed the trona deposits we mine today.”

     Room-and-pillar mining is the most common trona mining method. USGS describes the process as follows:

“…carving a series of rooms 20- to 30-feet wide while leaving pillars of ore 20- to 90- feet wide and as high as the ore bed to support the mine roof. When mining reaches the end of a section of ore, called a panel, the direction of mining is generally reversed (called the “retreat”) in an attempt to recover as much of the ore from the pillars as possible. Pillars are mined until the roof caves; that section of the mine is then abandoned. Generally, 50 to 60 percent of the minable ore is recovered using this system, although higher amounts are possible.”

     Trona ore processing involves crushing it, heating it to drive off gases, adding water, filtration, and evaporation. The resulting slurry is then centrifuged to separate the remaining water and soda ash crystals. The crystals are then dried, screened, and stored for transport.

 

 

Tata Chemicals’ Plans to Power Trona Mining Operations with Nuclear Micro-Reactors

     Another Green River soda ash mining player, Tata Chemicals Soda Ash Partners, is exploring the use of nuclear reactors to power mining operations. The plan under review is to use eight 50MW microreactors to provide up to 400MW of power. They recently signed an agreement with BWXT Advanced Technologies to install the reactors by the early 2030s. BWXT’s Advanced Nuclear Reactor (BANR) is a transportable, high-temperature gas-cooled microreactor.

“Once deployed, BANR microreactors would deliver on-demand electricity and process heat that is both carbon-free and resilient from external disruptions for one of the world’s leading producers of high-quality soda ash,” said Tata Chemicals in a press release.

Energy demands are high in trona mining, especially for the heat step in processing.

“The BANRs utilize Triso fuel, an innovative technology known for its enhanced safety and efficiency. This fuel type consists of uranium kernels coated with multiple layers of carbon and ceramic materials.”

     The BWXT microreactor design was aided by the US government’s Advanced Reactor Demonstration Programme. The mining facility has been in operation since 1968 and is in daily operation. These kinds of ‘transportable’ and small-scale nuclear reactors may offer a boon to decarbonizing energy-intensive mining and processing operations. Other energy-intensive industries, such as data centers are also exploring small-scale nuclear power as a low-carbon energy supply.

 

 

References:

 

US to mint nuclear power from soda mine with eight 50 MWt microreactors. Aman Tripathi. Interesting Engineering. December 20, 2024. US to mint nuclear power from soda mine with eight 50 MWt microreactors

Sodium carbonate. Wikipedia. Sodium carbonate - Wikipedia

Trona. Wikipedia. Trona - Wikipedia

New Wyoming Soda Ash Mine Expected To Create Over 2,000 Jobs in Sweetwater County. Cowboy State Daily. October 12, 2022. New Wyoming Soda Ash Mine Expected To Create Over 2,000 Jobs in Sweetwater County | Cowboy State Daily

Project West Puts $2.6 Billion Cost On Massive Wyoming Trona Plant. Pat Maio. Cowboy State Daily. February 27, 2024. Project West Puts $2.6 Billion Cost On Massive Wyoming Trona Plant | Cowboy State Daily

Going Underground In One Of Wyoming's Trona Mines. Renee Jean, Cowboy State Daily. November 23. 2023. Going Underground In One Of Wyoming's Trona Mines | Cowboy State Daily

What is soda ash and what is it used for? Alexander Johnson. Science Oxygen. September 3, 2022. What is soda ash and what is it used for?

Trona. Wyoming Mining Association. Wyoming Mining Association: Trona Mining

Potash, Soda Ash, and Borates. Energy and Environmental Profile of the U.S. Mining Industry. November 2013. ITP Mining: Energy and Environmental Profile of the U.S. Mining Industry: Chapter 3: Potash, Soda Ash, and Borates

Soda Ash. U.S. Geological Survey. 2024. Mineral Commodity Summaries 2024

Qatar Balks at Potential EU Gas Fees and the Possibility of Reviving a Proposed Gas Pipeline from the Qatari Persian Gulf through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, Turkey, to the EU

     The small Persian Gulf country of Qatar hosts the world’s third-largest natural gas reserves behind Russia and Iran. These reserves, calculated at 896 trillion cubic feet (25.4 trillion cubic meters) in 2011 make up about 14% of global known natural gas reserves. Qatar’s North Field is an extension of Iran’s South Pars/North Dome Gas-Condensate field, the largest natural gas field in the world, containing an estimated 1346 TCF (38.4 trillion cubic meters), or 1.346 quadrillion cubic feet (QCF).

 

 

Qatar Exports the Second-Highest Volume LNG, After the U.S.

 

 

Leading exporting countries of liquefied natural gas worldwide in 2023 (in billion cubic meters). Source: Statista

 

The Qatar–Türkiye Pipeline

     The $10 billion, 1,500-kilometer Qatar–Türkiye pipeline was first proposed in 2009. Syria’s Bashar al-Asad rejected the deal. Now that he is gone, the pipeline is reportedly being reconsidered. Assad’s rejection of the pipeline was thought to be due to his deference to Russia, which was emerging at the time as a major supplier of natural gas to Europe. Currently, Europe is still in need of gas, both pipelined gas and LNG as it further weans off of Russian supplies. This pipeline could connect it to a major source of supply. Since pipelined gas has a much lower carbon intensity than LNG, this would be preferable to the EU’s decarbonization efforts. Turkiye is already emerging as a gas transportation hub. They already have a pipeline connection to Aleppo, Syria, that accesses the fields in Palmyra that produce about 250MMCFday of gas. Syria also has gas potential offshore in the Mediterranean. In 2011 they were planning to issue licenses but the civil war put that on hold.

 

The EU’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and Qatar’s Objections

     The EU has been diversifying away from Russian gas since the advent of the Ukraine invasion and even before that. Qatari LNG is one source that had been increasing. Qatari LNG exports to the EU peaked in 2022 and now have dropped to pre-war levels as the 2nd graph below shows.

 

 Monthly imports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) from Qatar to the European Union (EU-27) from January 2022 to July 2024 (in million cubic meters). Source: Statista

 

 

According to Reuters:

“The rules, from 2028, will apply to companies that have more than 1,000 employees and a net worldwide turnover above 450 million euros ($480.8 million).”

“The law requires companies to prevent and end or mitigate potential or actual harm to human rights and the environment, such as child labour and biodiversity loss. It also requires remediation of actual adverse impact caused.”

“Financial companies will only have to consider upstream partners in their checks.”

“Companies will also have to prepare plans setting out how they will transition to a low carbon economy.”

    Qatar has objected to the rule if they are deemed in violation of it. Qatar has been accused of having an unfair migrant labor system of low-paid workers and has also been accused of human trafficking and slavery. The country’s legal system is based on Sharia law. I even recall some commentators calling Qatari gas, Sharia gas. The poor human rights record in Qatar was under scrutiny during the 2022 World Cup that was held there. My guess is the forced labor issues, rather than environmental impact issues, are the main concern of the EU regarding Qatar, but I could be wrong since the energy minister complained about emissions requirements.

"If the case is that I lose 5% of my generated revenue by going to Europe, I will not go to Europe. I’m not bluffing, Kaabi told the newspaper, adding that "5% of generated revenue of QatarEnergy means 5% of generated revenue of the Qatar state. This is the people's money, so I cannot lose that kind of money - and nobody would accept losing that kind of money."

“For us at QatarEnergy, and with all the expansions we are undertaking, I can assure you we can not meet net zero as a company,” Al-Kaabi said.

“We are also asked to be responsible for tier emissions 1, 2 and 3, and be liable for a penalty of up to 5% of our total generated revenue worldwide. This makes absolutely no sense.”

He suggests that the EU review the law and reconsider or otherwise not subject Qatar to fees. Qatar sells LNG to 20 countries, so they have some options.

References:

 

Erdogan's gas ambitions: Syrian regime change opens doors. PRC. Essa News. December 22, 2024. Erdogan's gas ambitions: Syrian regime change opens doors

Qatar vows to stop EU gas sales if fined under due diligence law, FT reports. Reuters. December 22, 2024. Qatar vows to stop EU gas sales if fined under due diligence law, FT reports | Reuters

EU parliament approves new business supply chain audit law. Reuters. April 24, 2024. EU parliament approves new business supply chain audit law | Reuters

Qatar Minister Calls Out EU for ESG Overreach, Compliance Costs. Bloomberg. December 8, 2024. Qatar Minister Calls Out EU for ESG Overreach, Compliance Costs

South Pars/North Dome Gas-Condensate field. Wikipedia. South Pars/North Dome Gas-Condensate field - Wikipedia

Natural gas in Qatar. Wikipedia Natural gas in Qatar - Wikipedia.

Qatar-Syria-Türkiye gas pipeline project: Is it possible after Assad’s fall? Turkiye Today. December 10, 2024. Qatar-Syria-Türkiye gas pipeline project: Is it possible after Assad's fall? - Türkiye Today

Where does the EU’s gas come from? European Council. 2024. Where does the EU’s gas come from? - Consilium

Human rights in Qatar. Wikipedia. Human rights in Qatar - Wikipedia

Pennsylvania Trucking Company to Be Fined for Emissions Cheating, Given Probation for Violating Clean Air Act

     Frock Bros. Trucking, based in New Oxford, Pennsylvania was recommended to be fined $80,000 and placed on 2-years’ probation for illegally modifying a fleet of eight diesel trucks to avoid required emissions controls. The sentence will be determined on January 9. The company hired a mechanic to disable the existing emissions control systems and the associated diagnostic equipment. They were charged with Federal crimes.

     The case is described below by the U.S. Department of Justice’s Environment and Natural Resources Division blog.

On October 1, 2024, Frock Brothers Trucking, Inc. (Frock), pleaded guilty to conspiracy and violating the Clean Air Act (CAA) for tampering with the emission control systems of several of their heavy-duty fleet trucks. The company admitted to disabling emission controls in violation of the CAA (18 U.S.C. § 371 and 42 U.S.C. § 7413(c)(2)(C)). The company is set for sentencing on January 9, 2025.

Frock, a long-distance trucking company based in New Oxford, Pennsylvania, transports a variety of goods, including snack foods, refrigerated items, and produce. Ed Frock owned the company until his death in August 2022.

Between November 13, 2018, and December 28, 2018, Frock contracted with co-defendant Leon Martin, a mechanic who operated out of his home, to disable and/or remove emission control components from eight of their diesel trucks. Martin also tampered with the required onboard diagnostic equipment (OBD) to delete factory-installed emission controls from Frock's heavy duty diesel trucks. Martin's tunes enabled those deleted trucks to operate without emission control devices as required by federal law.

Martin pleaded guilty to violating the Clean Air Act. He is scheduled for sentencing on January 7, 2025.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Criminal Investigation Division conducted the investigation.

     This case and others like it show that many businesses are willing to risk such fines and sentencing for financial benefit if they can get away with it, allowing them to bypass laws by which others, including their competitors, must abide. Many do not see diesel pollution as a real issue and in some cases, it may not be harmful. However, it is well known that particulate matter in particular, and other pollutants like NOx are elevated in such vehicles, which contribute to smog formation and dangerous levels of particulates (PM 2.5). According to the Evening Sun:

“According to court documents, prosecutors state that removal of these systems and devices can result in more than 40 times more pollution.”

 

References:

 

Trucking company to face consequences after endangering public health: 'The government's prosecution is a welcome sign for all people...'. Mike Taylor. The Cool Down. December 20, 2024. Trucking company to face consequences after endangering public health: 'The government's prosecution is a welcome sign for all people...'

Environmental Crimes Bulletin - October 2024. U.S. Dept. of Justice: Environment and Natural Resources Division. Blog. November 21, 2024. Environment and Natural Resources Division | Environmental Crimes Bulletin - October 2024

New Oxford trucking company pleads to Clean Air Act violation - disabled emissions monitor. Harrison Jones. Hanover Evening Sun. September 27, 2024. Frock Brothers Trucking pleads guilty to truck emissions tampering

NERC and FERC Attempt to Address Electricity Reliability Via Extreme Weather Planning, Security Upgrades, New Ride-Through Standards for Inverter-Based Resources (IBRs), and More from the Latest Meetings

     The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) just adopted two new standards, one related to extreme weather planning and another requiring reliability assessments by balancing authorities. The new standards are listed below as reported by Ethan Howland at Utility Dive:

·        TPL-008-1, focused on improving how planning coordinators and transmission planners prepare for the potential impacts of extreme heat and extreme cold temperature events; and,

·        BAL-007-1, requiring balancing authorities to perform energy reliability assessments in order to plan for potential energy emergencies in the near-term.

     NERC also adopted three new standards modifications related to distributed resources security, risk identification, and authority for data collection by balancing authorities, as detailed below.

NERC said standards modifications approved by the board include the following:

CIP-003-11, which aims to bolster the security of small distributed resources on the bulk electric system by adding controls to authenticate remote users, protect the authentication information in transit and detect malicious communications;

CIP-002-8, which provides improved risk identification by addressing the proper identification of transmission owner control centers that perform the functional obligations of a transmission operator, specifically those meeting medium-impact criteria; and,

TOP-003-7, to ensure that balancing authorities have the authority to collect the data needed to perform the near-term energy reliability assessments.

     NERC was also authorized to request, collect, and analyze cold weather generator data and submit an annual informational filing. NERC made a data request and filed its standards and modifications with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).

“The data request complements existing cold weather preparedness efforts, and the data will help evaluate what portion of a generator’s fleet can perform at the extreme cold weather temperatures for the location, what portion is under a corrective action plan (and until when) and what portion will not be winterized due to declared constraints,” NERC said.

 

 

FERC’s Proposed Ride-Through Reliability Standards for Inverter-Based Resources (IBRs) including Wind, Solar, and Batteries, and Other Highlights of the Open Meeting

 

FERC Commissioner David Rosner noted NERC’s warning in its 2024 Long Term Reliability Assessment that half of the country faces serious reliability risks and growing resource adequacy challenges over the next 10 years:

“Everyone in the room knows that this is not our first warning, and I think we all agree that this is an unacceptable risk,” Rosner said. “We need every last drop of efficiency we can get out of the current system. We need to keep a lot of the resources on the grid today, and we need to build to take advantage of the wealth of natural resources of all types that this country is so lucky to have … We need to make sure that our decisions send signals to invest in the right resources with the right attributes in the right places in the country where they’re needed.”

According to the NERC assessment:

“The trends point to critical reliability challenges facing the industry: satisfying escalating energy growth, managing generator retirements, and accelerating resource and transmission development.”

     Some selected maps, graphs, and tables from the assessment are shown depicting the regions most at risk, the different risks in each region, transmission buildout plans, and forecasted future generation shares by energy source.

 

    The proposed new standards involve the ability of IBRs to ‘ride through’ frequency and voltage changes like faults on the transmission system instead of tripping offline. NERC noted:

“Ensuring fault ride-through capability enables dynamic reactive power support, frequency response, and other services.”

NERC has been documenting instances of IBRs tripping offline including a 2022 event that resulted in 2.5 GW of solar in Texas unexpectedly going offline. The new proposed IBR standards

“…establishes voltage and frequency ride-through criteria for IBRs; and ensures that post-disturbance ramp rates return to pre-disturbance levels.”

These new standards are needed as more and more IBRs are added to the grid. Synchronous resources like natural gas, nuclear, and coal can generally ride through grid disturbances but IBRs must be pre-programmed to ride through.

In Order No. 901, the Commission explained, among other things, that the majority of installed IBRs use grid-following inverters, which can track grid state parameters (e.g., voltage angle) in milliseconds and react nearly instantaneously to changing grid conditions. The Commission then explained that, as found by multiple NERC reports, some IBRs “are not configured or programmed to support grid voltage and frequency in the event of a system disturbance, and, as a result, will reduce power output, exhibit momentary cessation, or trip in response to variations in system voltage or frequency.”

     Other highlights from the FERC meeting mostly involve individual projects. FERC commissioner Judy Chang lamented the lack of transparency and oversight of transmission projects. Rosner also mentioned a 900-MW solar project in Virginia that was removed from the interconnection queue due to being late on a security deposit payment by hours, noting that the generation was needed and the current process failed by making them start the muti-year process over again. Utility Dive also noted:

“A coalition of ratepayer advocates and groups representing large energy users on Thursday filed a complaint at FERC seeking to bar transmission owners from independently planning local transmission projects above 100-kV.”

Sales of companies were approved in the meeting and a New England (ISO-NE) region dispute about who pays for O&M costs for network upgrades was clarified.

 

 

References:

 

NERC adopts 2 new standards to boost extreme weather reliability. Robert Walton. Utility Dive. December 16, 2024. NERC adopts 2 new standards to boost extreme weather reliability | Utility Dive

FERC floats ‘ride-through’ reliability standards for wind, solar, batteries, plus 5 other open meeting takeaways. Ethan Howland. Utility Dive. December 20, 2024. FERC floats ‘ride-through’ reliability standards for wind, solar, batteries, plus 5 other open meeting takeaways | Utility Dive

Announcement: NERC Advances Extreme Weather Protection, Energy Assurance, and Approves 2025 Work Plan Priorities. December 10, 2024. Board 10DEC24.pdf

Standards Actions Project 2023-04 Modifications to CIP-003.  Soo Jin Kim, Vice President, Engineering, Standards, and PRISM. Board of Trustees Meeting. December 10, 2024. North American Electric Reliability Corporation. board-open-meeting-agenda-package-standards.pdf

Reliability Standards for Frequency and Voltage Protection Settings and Ride-Through for Inverter-Based Resources (Issued December 19, 2024). Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. E-10 | RM25-3-000 | Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

2024 Long-Term Reliability Assessment. December 2024. North American Electric Reliability Corporation. Report

Para-Environmentalism: How Do Implausible Ideas Become Popular? And Other Tales of Ideological Manipulation and Lunatic Fringes

     Since no one wants to eat or drink poison or breathe dirty air that leads to diseases, we are all united by at least a minimum degree of desire for environmental protection. To some extent, we demand it as a fundamental right. As a recognized public good, environmental protection becomes necessary to some extent. Most often the arguments about environmental protection involve where to put the line between what will be acceptable and what will be not acceptable, and what will be the consequences for crossing that line. Precautionists favor a line that will make many things unacceptable if they even hint at environmental impact, while others argue that such pre-emptive non-approval would be unnecessarily dangerous to our economy as well as impede further understanding of environmental impacts. Another way to see environmentalism is to separate views into catastrophic and non-catastrophic narratives. Both extremes: catastrophists and so-called climate deniers seem to be more driven and unfortunately more influential than the more moderate majority. Bad news sells better.

     This post was spurred by a November article in Compact Magazine by Holly Jean Buck, a sociology professor at the University of Buffalo, entitled ‘The Rise of Green MAGA.” I thought her name sounded familiar, then I figured it out by looking at the books she had written. One is on geoengineering and climate impact restoration. The other is entitled ‘Ending Fossil Fuels: Why Net Zero is Not Enough’, published in 2021. Then I recalled I had written about her book description in my 2021 book ‘Sensible Decarbonization.’ I offered her description as an example of an overly radical view that was demanding unrealistic, authoritarian, and socialist measures to address climate change. I still agree with that assessment. The book description is reproduced below:

“Ending the fossil fuel industry is the only credible path for climate policy. Around the world, countries and companies are setting net-zero carbon emissions targets. But what will it mean if those targets are achieved? One possibility is that fossil fuel companies will continue to produce billions of tons of atmospheric CO2 while relying on a symbiotic industry to scrub the air clean. Focusing on emissions draws our attention away from the real problem: the point of production. The fossil fuel industry must come to an end but will not depart willingly; governments must intervene. By embracing a politics of rural-urban coalitions and platform governance, climate advocates can build the political power needed to nationalize the fossil fuel industry and use its resources to draw carbon out of the atmosphere.”

Rural-urban coalitions and platform governance = unrealistic. Governments must intervene to stop fossil fuel production = authoritarian. Nationalizing and reorienting the fossil fuel industry = socialistic.

 

Para-Environmentalism (or Fringe Environmentalism)

     Despite the bad taste in my mouth from her book description, I read Buck’s article about the rise of Green MAGA and found it interesting. Not that I agreed with everything, but she did bring up some interesting points. She coined the term para-environmentalism to depict fringe environmentalism, in the vein of parapsychology or paranormal phenomena. Like many idea-spheres fringe environmentalism comes in many flavors and from different perspectives.

     Several researchers and writers have pointed out that the history of environmentalism has episodes of racism, authoritarianism, and anti-humanist activities. Very early environmentalists (I believe this was all pre-1950) were sometimes in cahoots with proponents of eugenics and many Nazis could be considered to be environmentalists. There is a right-wing-oriented book that highlights Nazi environmentalism and the attempts to associate Nazism with modern left-wing-led environmentalism.  Later when Paul Ehrlich raised the alarm about population dynamics (which proved to be incredibly wrong) many environmentalists advocated for forced population control. In countries in Asia, South America, and Africa one result was mass sterilization campaigns. Thus, both left-wing extremism and right-wing extremism have historically been associated with environmentalism.

     A 2022 segment on NPR’s All Things Considered was about the intersection between far-right views and environmentalism. They brought back the Nazi connection to some early environmentalism, not as evidence of the deluded left, but of the manipulative right.  NPR’s Ari Shapiro noted that an anti-Mexican mass shooter invoked environmentalism in his manifesto:

“In El Paso, Texas, in 2019, a mass shooter killed more than 20 people and wounded more than 20 others. He told authorities he was targeting Mexicans, and he also left behind a manifesto - quote, "the decimation of the environment is creating a massive burden for future generations." The shooter wrote, if we can get rid of enough people, then our way of life can be more sustainable. He titled that manifesto An Inconvenient Truth, which was also the name of Al Gore's Oscar-winning 2006 documentary about climate change.”

     The segment also brought up anti-immigrant, or xenophobic environmentalism, ideas like immigrants are dumping trash along the border, tainting the environment. Dr. Dorceta Taylor of Yale University noted that “the movement to preserve natural spaces in the U.S. was partly motivated by a backlash against the racial mixing of American cities.”

     Apparently, as the segment notes, the Sierra Club is attempting to address its anti-humanist past. It’s one-time director David Brower encouraged Paul Ehrlich to write his book and supported his depopulation strategy. The segment concludes with the opinion that an apocalyptic view of climate change can be exploited by the far-right for their own ends.

     Joseph Kast and Larry Salzman in a 2022 article in Sword & Scales about apocalyptic environmentalism offered the following timeline of failed apocalyptic environmental predictions.

 

     While fact-checking and documenting the past failures of apocalyptic environmentalism is easy and fruitful, it seems to be ineffective at swaying public opinion. For a lot of people, facts don’t matter as much as ideological talking points. There is often a gap between reality and perceived reality. It is prevalent in perception of risk where fears or lack of fears often do not match facts. This is known as the risk perception gap. 

     David Mountain writes in a 2021 article in the Skeptical Inquirer, depicting two traditions of environmentalism, one rational that has led to improved understanding and improved environmental protection and the other irrational that has led to a depiction of all environmentalism as being fringe. The risk perception gap is often of the irrational view:

“Modern environmentalism is the heir to both these traditions: the scientific and pragmatic and the spiritual and nostalgic. However we choose to measure environmentalism’s success—laws passed, acres protected, lives improved—the former has been to its merit; the latter, ultimately, has been to its detriment.”

      Environmentalism, or at least its fruits, are accepted in many ways: Earth Day observances, company websites full of data about emissions reduction efforts and environmental compliances, and recycling, for example. In other ways that are seen as more extreme, environmentalists are depicted as anti-progress tree huggers, which is sometimes true. We have the Degrowth Movement and other calls to limit economic activity. There are many examples and books of these two strands of environmentalism: the pragmatic and catastrophist versions. Read Naomi Klein, Bill McKibben, David Wallace-Wells, etc. for the catastrophist versions and Bjorn Lomborg, Ted Nordhaus and his colleagues at the Breakthrough Institute, Robert Bryce, etc. for the pragmatic versions.

    Mountain argues that radical environmentalism became widely accepted in the 1990s. He cites organic farming, acknowledging its benefits, but also noting its limitations, and he concludes that it is not the solution to sustainable agriculture due to its low yields and inefficiency which make it require much more land use for the same yields. The myth that locally grown produce was better for the environment used to be commonplace but has been proven false in recent decades. He also points out that pseudo-science has often overlapped with environmentalism at times in its past from the early 20th-century focus on ideas like biodynamic farming to the New Age beliefs that merged with environmentalism in the 1970s and 80s.

     As I have pointed out many times, the fringe or para-environmentalists often end up influencing outcomes that lead to less environmental protection and more GHG emissions. In addition, they undermine the sincere efforts of pragmatic environmentalists by generating a backlash against their fringe positions. Buck, in her Green MAGA article, cites a Pew Research poll that concludes that one-third of Americans (31%) support phasing out fossil fuels while a slightly higher amount thinks they should never be phased out (35%). She, judging by her book title, is clearly in the minority. The graph below shows the questions and breakdown, and the second graph shows opinions on oil, gas, and mining by political persuasion. Of course, the political divide is quite clear.

     I agree with Buck that censorship is not the answer:

“Using algorithms to deplatform “climate denial” or “misinformation” is a misguided response.”

Buck also disses environmentalism’s links to pseudo-science. I was once talking to an acquaintance, an older woman who had just gotten her Ph.D., though I forget her subject. She mentioned “fracking” and I told her I worked in the oil & gas industry, was long involved with it, and was not worried about its negative effects, hoping to sway her view a bit. She soon started talking about chemtrails, indicating she strongly believed the wacky hype about them. Then, I knew that it would be difficult and not worth the effort to convince her of anything. Buck says that para-environmentalists are not anti-science, but I think it’s hard not to conclude that they are willing to be anti-science if it advances their narrative. She notes some views about the pandemic that there was a perception that health scientists were politicizing health data. I agree with her assessment that climate scientist Michael Mann is an anti-fossil fuel partisan. She also brings up chemtrails and conspiracy theories about the government secretly influencing the weather with modification and geoengineering experiments, and that Trump’s nominee for HHS Secretary, RFK Jr. has supported chemtrail conspiracy theories (among many others).

     Buck also argues that para-environmentalism has gone from fringe to mainstream. She gives some examples where fringe beliefs have penetrated mainstream science, but I do not agree that this has become widespread.

“The point is that environmentalist academics and intellectuals have played a role in feeding para-environmental beliefs. And some of the scholarship on the influence of fossil-fuel companies has conspiratorial overtones of its own.”

She also thinks that climate politics are locked into this adoption of fringe beliefs and that the desire for people, including academic scholars, to be influencers in the temple of public opinion has been a factor or a perverse incentive. She calls them scholar -influencer-activists: 

“An effective strategy for climate politics would address para-environmental concerns, recognizing the valid reasons people have for distrusting elites and experts. It would avoid using science to score partisan points. This isn’t what the prominent voices in the climate movement are doing—and to an unfortunate extent, they can’t. The climate movement can’t stop following these counterproductive messengers and put forth more broadly appealing leaders because of the perverse incentives described previously. If Mann didn’t exist, digital platforms would elevate someone else to play his role.”

     It seems a bit strange to me to read someone, a Ph.D. social scientist who certainly seems to have radical views based on her book title, explain and critique the whole idea of fringe views.

     One thing we can agree on is that climate adaptation should be prioritized. In fact, across the spectrum of views, this idea can be agreed upon. I heard an NPR segment the other day with David Wallace-Wells, who when asked about Trump’s influence on climate the next four years, decided to talk most about the potential implications of climate adaptation to help us ride out climate impacts. Buck also paints adaptation as a priority. Perhaps they are just focusing on the positive, but people like Bjorn Lomborg and Ted Nordhaus would agree that should be our priority. The state of New York a few years ago decided to delay climate adaptation in favor of advancing faster adoption of renewable energy. That was a mistake, an incorrect reversal of priorities, in my opinion. As I always like to point out, climate adaptation includes extreme weather adaptation that would still be needed if climate change was not a concern and the totality of climate impacts includes the cumulative impacts of natural and anthropogenic climate change. Thus, adaptation will likely be needed anyway, and since most people can agree on it, it should be prioritized. I have also pointed out that adaptation would better be depicted as extreme weather preparation, especially for politicians who are primed to fight back against environmental overreach when using terms like climate change adaptation, often for good reason.

 

 

References:

 

The Rise of Green MAGA. Holly Jean Buck. Compact Magazine. November 21, 2024. The Rise of Green MAGA | Compact

The far-right and environmentalism overlap is bigger than you think — and growing. Ari Shapiro, Matt Ozug, and Casey Morell. NPR. All Things Considered. April 1, 2022. The far-right and environmentalism overlap is bigger than you think — and growing | Georgia Public Broadcasting

Environmentalism and the Fringe. David Mountain. The Skeptical Inquirer: Volume 45, No. 4. July/August 2021. Environmentalism and the Fringe | Skeptical Inquirer

Apocalyptic Environmentalists Want Fewer Humans on Earth. Joseph Kast & Larry G. Salzman. Sword & Scales. December 1, 2022.  In-Depth Outlook About Apocalyptic Environmentalists

1. What Americans think about an energy transition from fossil fuels to renewables. Pew Research Center. Brian Kennedy, Cary Funk, and Alec Tyson. June 28, 2023. How Americans view transitioning from fossil fuels to renewable energy | Pew Research Center

Energy Justice Case Win for Those Cheated by Maryland’s Deregulated Energy Retailers (Now Being Challenged in Court)

     Deregulated energy retailers have been accused in several states of punishing consumers with high fees and rates after introductory rates no longer apply and if a payment is missed. Here in Ohio, a deregulated energy state, one is often annoyed with mail, phone calls, texts, and even proselytizers (as in my local Walmart – I always avoid walking past them) trying to sell electricity and other forms of energy like natural gas services. These third-party retail suppliers are supposed to increase competition and lower rates but that often does not happen. Indeed, as many have discovered over the years, the reverse can happen with people getting locked in at higher rates and subject to increases.

     In Maryland, they have been accused of bilking customers by increasing rates from low introductory rates and charging massively higher rates if a payment is missed or late.

     Inside Climate News reporter Aman Azhar wrote about this activity in Maryland, which deregulated energy in 1999. He writes that deregulation:

“…opened the door to deceitful bait-and-switch practices by the retail suppliers. One recent study found that retail energy has cost mostly low-income consumers more than $1 billion in utility overpayments since 2014. Through another common practice called “slamming,” sales representatives often use customers’ utility account numbers to take over their accounts without their consent.”

He gives one case where a consumer switched suppliers to get a $20 gift card and ended up being charged hundreds of dollars higher for electricity. These big increases then cause people to get further behind on their bills and face shutoff in some cases. Governor Wes Moore signed Senate Bill 1 in April 2024 that includes:

“…a raft of helpful provisions, including new licensing requirements and expanded oversight by the Maryland Public Service Commission coupled with additional fines and penalties to protect consumers.”

“The legislation seeks to return over $150 million a year to the pockets of hardworking Marylanders, over 300,000 of them,” said state Senator Malcolm Augustine.

     Energy retailers were adamantly against the bill, but others noted the bill was necessary and fair, especially to those victimized by these rip-off business practices:

“Over the past decade, our office has investigated and participated in significant litigated cases against more than a dozen retail suppliers who charged exorbitant rates to thousands of Marylanders,” David Lapp, Maryland’s People’s Counsel said, explaining that many of those targeted by retail suppliers were limited-income households, elderly and disadvantaged individuals and families.”

     One person thought their electric bill was so high because they had an older gas furnace but no, it was their choice of retail energy supplier that was the cause (basically stealing their money). The person did not even know that had switched suppliers.

“One big problem with the state’s deregulated utility market is a regulation known as “purchase of receivables,” volunteer Laurel Peltier said, which the Maryland Public Service Commission had approved in 2010. It guaranteed that the energy retailers would get paid by the regulated utility even when their customers defaulted, creating a big incentive for energy retailers to charge higher rates.”

“The new law that the Maryland General Assembly just passed eliminated the purchase of receivables, which is great news for people like Grayson and Burlock,” Peltier said.

“Another reform provision in the legislation is that anyone can call Baltimore Gas & Electric and say they no longer wanted to remain with the third-party retailer, which can be particularly helpful to older people who can be easily confused by energy sales pitches, Peltier said. “That way even if someone switched their account, the system will reject it,” she said

     These seem like necessary reforms. The reality in Maryland is that people right next door to those paying normal energy rates may be paying much higher rates. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that that is unfair and basically a rip-off.

     A 2022 study by Berkeley Energy Institute found that low-income households and marginalized communities face particularly high prices for energy from retail suppliers. It also found that low-income Black, Hispanic, and immigrant families were targeted in Baltimore through direct marketing and ended up paying the highest rates. It’s particularly grotesque that people with very low household incomes below $10,000 per year were consistently paying the highest rates. They were essentially profiting most from these poor customers. Low-income households were already paying a higher percentage of their income from energy before they got ripped off further.

     A 2022 report by the Office of the People’s Council showed that some people were paying 15% of their total income for household energy expenses, as shown below.

     The Berkeley Energy Institute study also showed that more retail energy suppliers were targeting low-income neighborhoods with door-to-door marketing campaigns.

Peltier notes that:

“In 2021, the Maryland General Assembly passed legislation prohibiting retail suppliers from charging customers on energy assistance more than what a regulated utility would charge for gas or electricity. About $15 million from the state energy assistance grants was flowing annually to third-party suppliers at the time.”

     Aman Azhar reported in October in Inside Climate News that the new Maryland  law, set to go into effect in January 2025 as being challenged in court by the bigger energy retailers:

“NRG Energy, Constellation Energy and American Power & Gas, worked hard behind the scenes to keep the bill from passing, contending that the law would drive energy companies away from Maryland, stifle competition and harm the state’s clean energy mandate by limiting people’s access to green electricity products.”

He noted that there are about 120 different retailers working in Maryland. He describes the lawsuit:

“On Oct. 1, the Retail Energy Advancement League, an industry group representing energy retailers, and Green Mountain Energy Co., a subsidiary of the Texas-based energy giant NRG, filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Baltimore.”

“In the 37-page complaint, the petitioners allege that the provisions in the bill requiring retail energy companies to prove their products are “green” violate the First Amendment rights of retail suppliers. They also argue that the law violated the Constitution by imposing unlawful burdens on interstate commerce.”

     Some people have been paying much higher rates to retailers for years without even knowing it.  Chris Ercoli, president and CEO of one of the plaintiffs, the Retail Energy Advancement League:

“…denied that energy retailers were overcharging customers and said the legislation would establish a price cap lower than that charged by the state’s primary regulated utility, BGE, “while also introducing provisions that make it more expensive to conduct business and further stacking the deck in favor of the utility.” Nearly half a million Maryland consumers who have chosen a retail energy provider will be affected by this legislation, he said.

    Office of the People’s Council’s Lapp noted that the new law simply requires suppliers to include disclosures to keep customers informed. He suggests the retailers have been confusing people about green energy, most of which is bought by consumers via trading renewable energy credits, often from out of state. Senator Augustine noted that the legislation aims:

“…to create a fair and open market for the larger retail energy supply, and then to create a secondary market that has more flexibility for the renewable energy markets. I feel really good about the guardrails that we have created.”

     If there’s one thing that gets under my skin it is people and businesses ripping people off with deceptive business practices, especially in obvious cases like this one.

 

References:

 

Twenty-Five Years After Maryland Deregulated Its Retail Energy Market, a Huge in Looms for Energy Justice Advocates. Aman Azhar. Inside Climate News. May 8, 2024. Twenty-Five Years After Maryland Deregulated Its Retail Energy Market, a Huge Win Looms For Energy Justice Advocates - Inside Climate News

Competing for (In)attention:  Price Discrimination in Residential Electricity Markets. Jenya Kahn-Lang. Berkeley Energy Institute WP 333. November 2022. WP333.pdf

Maryland Low-Income Market Characterization Report: 2022 Report Update. Office of People’s Council. Affordability Baseline

Advocates, Legislators Are Confident Maryland Law to Rectify Retail Energy Market Will Survive Industry’s Legal Challenge. Aman Azhar. Inside Climate News. October 21, 2024. Advocates, Legislators Are Confident Maryland Law to Rectify Retail Energy Market Will Survive Industry’s Legal Challenge  - Inside Climate News