Energy For the People

To the Editor:
Today, environmentalists focus on greenhouse gases (mainly carbon dioxide). A powerful constituency for the president and his party, they get a sympathetic ear at the White House. The president believes in global warming/climate change, and its stepchild sea rise (should we buy Vineland beachfront futures?)
For passionate proponents (a.k.a. Enviros), global warming’s settled science. Mankind contributes to it via carbon dioxide emissions, though impact is not clear. The belief has been called the “church” of global warming by non-believers, saying it is far from settled science, casting doubt on the extent of mankind’s role or whether we can do much about it. One Enviros’ idea: drastically reduce the use of fossil fuels in electric-power generation, especially coal, but oil and natural gas too. The EPA is the government’s muscle to this end and through new, tougher emissions regulations some 32 coal-fired plants are due to be shut down with another 36 on deck for closing, according to an Associated Press (AP) report.
Thirty-seven percent of our electricity comes from coal. This generating capacity should not be lost. Some of the plants will convert to cleaner natural gas but it appears the Enviros would prefer us to get most of our juice from wind and solar sources. Unrealistic! These are intermittent sources: wind doesn’t blow when you want, the sun doesn’t shine on cue. To become the 24/7/365 reliable sources as fossil fuels and nuclear, technology must be developed for storing energy from wind and solar. The cost of building wind and solar capacity (securing sites and installing hardware) is high, as is getting from source to grid (securing rights of way, constructing transmission lines). They’ll evolve in time, but as supplemental sources.
Caution is needed in taking our mainstay sources off line, absent ready, around-the-clock replacements. Why? The U.S. Energy Information Agency forecasts out to 2040 show generating capacity parallels demand; national average excess capacity, about 13 percent. That small buffer can be misleading. Some areas of the country may require rolling blackouts or brownouts seasonally, because local demand exceeds supply. These have and will occur, e.g., Texas Apr. 2006 and Feb.2011. There’s concern California is moving too much to wind and solar and the capacity short fall it may cause.
The local issue of converting the B.L. England Beesley’s Point power plant from coal to natural gas has gas-pipeline trouble from laws regarding Pinelands. But beyond Pinelands issues, Mark S. Lohbauer, Chairman of the N.J. Pinelands Commission wrote: “The coal-to-gas conversion would take B.L. England from ‘peaker’ status, operating only 30 to 60 days a year to full-time, year round operation. Hydrocarbon emissions and some other pollutants would be reduced, but carbon dioxide-the greenhouse gas-and fine pollutants would dramatically increase.”
For Enviros, there’s always one more thing. That plant will shut down without the conversion and instead of adding needed capacity we eliminate it. Wrong direction. In this “war” against fossil fuels, the Enviros keep moving the goalpost. The Keystone XL pipeline; once seen as a threat to the Ogallala aquifer, now has a new safe route, but still required years of environmental impact studies. The study’s report: the project has negligible environmental impact. But Enviros have vowed lawsuits and civil disobedience (AP). Enviros discourage production and use of fossil fuels. Note their crusade against fracking.
The economic health of the nation and its global competitiveness depends on reliable, inexpensive energy for both electricity and transportation. We’ll need fossil fuels from friendly sources for the foreseeable future.