National Post (National Edition)
Green energy not to blame for Texas power outage
In his column on the freezing temperatures and resulting power outages in Texas last week, Rex Murphy argued that the overzealous concern progressives have for global warming is pushing us toward dangerous green investments (Hurling Public Money at Renewables is Dangerous, Rex Murphy, Feb. 18). Environmentalists, he argued, have been “harassing everyone from schoolchildren to government officials for the near 30 years” with an “alarmist narrative.”
Our false alarm, according to Murphy, has led to menacing political interference in North America's fossil-based energy infrastructure. He cites the failure of Texas green energy in last week's severe winter weather as the latest example of policy-makers “hurling vast sums of public money on renewable energy, (which) is not only a folly, but dangerous.” But is he right that Texas' winter misery, the failure of its power grid and the boil-water advisories in some parts of the state is the fault of green energy and its reckless proponents?
Last week in Texas, wind power performed comparatively well relative to the winter prediction models developed by the ironically named Electric Reliability Council of Texas, the entity that operates the majority of the state's power grid. Its own automated reporting immediately revealed that half of natural gas production was off-line when the rolling blackouts began. Some wind power was out due to freezing, but in total, less than 10 per cent of Texas' winter power capacity (seven gigawatts) was expected to come from wind and solar. On the other hand, 66 per cent (56 gigawatts) was supposed to come from gas.
Much of the state's thermoelectric generators failed. A nuclear power plant went down, partially, then about half the state's natural gas generators failed. Most failed not because they couldn't operate, but because they ran out of fuel.
Pipelines and gas production facilities froze. Almost all of the grid's surge capacity comes from natural gas, so when the supply of gas runs dry, the system has no ability to meet spikes in demand. How could this be?
Federal regulators have a rule that energy infrastructure must be built to a winterized standard. Texas operates its own grid, partly out of pride, but also because energy companies with the ear of politicians don't want to have to listen to federal regulators. Former governor Rick Perry is already appealing to Texans' pride, but really shilling for his corporate and political benefactors, and being laughed at for suggesting that avoiding federal rules is worth the cost of watching Texans freeze in the dark.
The windmills in Texas are not winterized, as they are in my hometown in southern Ontario and everywhere else in the United States, including neighbouring states like Oklahoma and New Mexico. Natural gas pipelines do not freeze in Edmonton or Alaska. The nuclear power plant failed because of frozen cooling lines that are not housed indoors.
Texas also does not store much natural gas, because prodigious ground reserves can be pumped on demand. But that system failed, too. Natural gas soared from a few bucks to a record US$1,000 per MMBtu, but even at that price, they still could not deliver enough of it to electric plants in order to meet demand.
Texas' energy independence also means that there is limited interconnectivity to grids to the east and west, so when the state's generation failed, we couldn't import power properly, either.
Texas didn't go down because of green energy, it did so because no one planned to deal with a winter storm, even though this happened in 1989, and again in 2011. It happened because it is a highly deregulated, privatized market that does not incentivize investment in winter resilience. It was made all that much worse by the fact that corporate political influence shields private energy infrastructure from the federal standards that mandate it.
The system allows energy companies to save on investment, and the public to save a few cents on their electricity bills, but those savings all get wiped out when a massive disruption, like we saw last week, causes widespread outages and insanely high prices that people are forced to pay so they don't freeze to death.
Consumers who were fortunate enough to have power flowing during the peak of the crisis, and whose electric bills are tethered to open market prices (an estimated 25 per cent of households), are now receiving shocking four-figure bills. Before the power was even restored, it was announced that the price of electricity would be going up for everyone in the coming year to recoup the costs. It would be more correct to say that the cost of a failed gamble is being passed on to consumers.
Yet Gov. Greg Abbott and other Republicans are attacking green energy, in order to deflect from any discussion about why the system failed and how to ensure it doesn't happen again.
Rex Murphy picked up their talking points — likely in a warm house with reliable, regulated power in frozen Canada — and recycled them for a domestic audience, understandably eager to believe that our climate challenges are overblown and that the solutions do more harm than good. In reality, however, the reason that Texas is now experiencing such severe winter storms is because climate change has made polar vortex disruptions more common, and more severe.
With new optimism for constructive change, and North American green energy plans surely to be discussed when U.S. President Joe Biden meets with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Tuesday, it would be to our advantage to deal in facts.
THE COST OF A FAILED GAMBLE IS BEING PASSED
ON TO CONSUMERS.
Justin Trudeau's ears must have perked up smartly — assuming he does in fact have ears under those increasingly shaggy locks — when the new U.S. president addressed a digital conference on European security.
“America,” quoth Joe Biden, “is back.”
As Canadians we all know our prime minister holds the copyright on being back as a country. He declared it to the world five years ago and has perhaps lived to regret it as the world failed to treat poor polite us as anything more than the somewhat self-righteous middle power we've ever been. It's entirely possible Biden had no inkling he was lifting a line from Trudeau when he announced the U.S. return, or perhaps he felt entitled to a bit of borrowing, given how shamelessly Trudeau co-opted Biden's “build back better” campaign theme as his own.
They have much in common, these two. Biden's US$1.9 trillion stimulus plan leaves Trudeau's initial $82 billion version looking like a sad little cousin in patched clothing, but both clearly suffer no qualms about vast outpourings of borrowed money. Biden has already re-upped the U.S. in the Paris climate accord, which mirrors Trudeau's quick trip to Paris in 2015 — at great cost in emissions — so a bevy of Canadian politicos could photo-op themselves at the summit. They employ similar rhetoric about their unyielding devotion to protecting Mother Earth, reducing gender gaps and generally being good people dedicated to saying all the right things.
Biden's address to the Munich Security Conference, his first such appearance since taking office, no doubt also sent a shiver of relief through Ottawa as it addressed Canada's No. 1 foreign problem: what to do about China. The previous U.S. administration was big on confrontation but not so hot on practical follow-through or cooperation with allies. Biden, in contrast, pledged to play a reliable and robust role in NATO and pressed European counterparts on the need for a shared strategy on a range of mutual concerns. In particular he singled out the threat represented by a “long term strategic competition with China.”
The world, he said, is at an “inflection point” between “those who argue … that autocracy is the best way forward … and those who understand that democracy is essential,” checking off a range of issues needing cooperation among western democracies.
“We have to push back against the Chinese government's economic abuses and coercion that undercut the foundations of the international economic system,” he said, citing as well “those who would monopolize and normalize repression.”
“We cannot focus only on the competition among countries that threaten to divide the world, or only on global challenges that threaten to sink us all together if we fail to co-operate. We must do both, working in lockstep with our allies and partners.”
Could sweeter words be heard in Ottawa? Cooperation was certainly the thinking behind The Declaration of Arbitrary Detention in State-to-State Relations unveiled last week by Foreign Minister Marc Garneau. Bearing the signature of 58 states, including the U.S., the declaration is primarily an effort to pressure China into releasing Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig by marshalling muscle Canada doesn't have on its own. But without the reappearance of the U.S. as a reliable playing partner in international gatherings, nothing much was going to get done on that matter or many others.
Trudeau is due for a oneon-one session with Biden
THEY HAVE MUCH IN COMMON, THESE TWO.
in a virtual meeting Tuesday and no doubt there will be much shared affirmation of their devotion to cross-border cooperation, even if the border is pretty much sealed to millions of people on both sides at the moment. Already the White House has pledged “the President will highlight the strong and deep partnership between the United States and Canada as neighbours, friends and NATO Allies,” while Trudeau has vowed “we will work together to end the COVID-19 pandemic and support people in both our countries.”
What Trudeau will be praying for is much greater willingness from Washington to settle disputes rather than create them, as was the habit of the previous administration. Biden has already cancelled the Keystone oil pipeline and signed an order requiring the government to “Buy American,” but there should be a lot less name-calling in future, and Trudeau should be fairly confident the president won't start trashing him on Twitter the moment he hangs up the phone.
Maybe Biden will even agree to put a bit of muscle into pressuring China on its hostage diplomacy. The return to “normal” highlights just how much Canada's well-being depends on friendly relations south of the border, and the personal inclinations of whoever happens to occupy America's highest office. If America is truly “back,” Canada is back to playing nice and hoping for a positive reception.