Reliable Energy is the Best Fuel for Our National Security
By James A. Brock
Chief Executive Officer CONSOL Energy
Today’s modern world runs on energy. Every facet of society—industry, commerce, healthcare, our communities large and small—depends on access to affordable power. This is a reality none of us can evade, yet power is the one necessity most of us take for granted. When it comes to our national security, we seem oblivious to this reality. However, as the U.S. continues to favor intermittent power sources, like wind and solar, and aspires to move away from reliable fossil fuels like coal, we are now seeing the unintended consequences of not having a realistic plan in place to help manage this transition effectively. These consequences also bring to light serious considerations for our national security and energy independence.
Grid Stability is National Security
The reliability of our power grid is critical to our most basic needs for survival, especially in times of high energy demand. Our homes, schools, hospitals, businesses, industries, and governments all stop functioning without a steady flow of electricity. Yet, to reach established net-zero goals by 2050, fossil-fuel power plants are now retiring much faster than dispatchable and dependable replacement sources are being developed, according to PJM, a regional transmission organization (RTO).[1] This imbalance is leading to increased power shortages and risks of rolling blackouts. Estimates suggest that America’s bulk power system could be facing serious energy shortfalls in the near future.[2] On top of this, America’s need for energy continues to steadily increase, due to electrification, population growth, and infrastructure buildout.
For instance, the Dallas Federal Reserve estimates the direct and indirect costs to the Texas economy from the freezing event of 2021 to be between $80 billion and $130 billion dollars.[3] National emergencies like this are a clear signal that, at least for the foreseeable future, our security requires a storable energy source, like coal, that can provide months of dependable on-site power, and quickly adjust to fluctuating demand. Germany recently ignored the essential need for baseload energy and had to put several coal-fueled power plants back online in order to provide electricity during a natural gas shortage crisis. What can we conclude from these events? The value and advantages that coal provides are irreplaceable, given our current energy mix.
Rushing to Renewables Risks Our Energy Independence
A renewable energy economy will require a massive new infrastructure buildout, including power lines, charging stations, wind turbines, solar panels, battery storage, and yes, land–lots of it. [4] [5] [6] A recent foreign policy paper from the Brookings Institute estimates renewable power requires 10 times more land area than fossil fuels per unit of power produced.[7] This is a stunning number to many, especially to those whose goal is low impact or no impact to the environment.
To build this net-zero world, we are now seeing astonishing numbers related to the amount of minerals and materials required to realize decarbonization targets. In his recent Congressional testimony, Mark Mills of the Manhattan Institute commented that according to the International Energy Agency (IEA), to accommodate wind and solar power increases, the mining of certain critical energy minerals will have to increase between 400% and 4000% in the next two decades.[8] Again, these are extraordinary numbers that also carry environmental considerations. From experience, we know mining operations take 16 years, on average,[9] to ramp up and produce results. This hard reality means any transition to renewables will likely take decades before it can reach its full potential.
Even more concerning is considering from where all these minerals and materials originate. The Institute for Energy Research claims, “China already has 80 to 90 percent of the global rare-earth market.” These are metallic elements vital to many high-tech products, including wind turbines and electric vehicle motors.[10] Many of the countries fueling our renewable-driven need for critical minerals are not fully aligned with the U.S. when it comes to workplace safety and environmental standards, let alone our national security interests. With respect to our economy, this dependency is irresponsible. With respect to our national security, it is completely unacceptable.
What is the Return on Our Renewable Energy Investment?
According to a recent McKinsey & Company study, capital spending on physical assets in support of net-zero goals would require an investment of $275 trillion dollars between 2021 and 2050. [11] So what do we get in return for an investment this large?
Again, Mark Mills has observed that after investing trillions of dollars globally into renewable energy over the last 20 years, the world has ‘“not significantly changed the energy landscape,” realizing only a 2% reduction in fossil fuel use, from 86% to 84%, as a percentage of all energy produced.[12] Over this same period, the overall use of fossil fuels around the world has increased by 41%, with coal increasing by 55%.[13] These remarkable numbers require a reality check by responsible experts who can weigh the incredible costs of the renewable energy transition against the actual results being achieved.
More Analysis and Less Narrative
As the saying goes, “you can ignore reality, but you can’t ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.” And the consequences of rushing too quickly away from fossil fuels are certainly unavoidable. They require leadership, purpose, and direction. They raise serious questions. What is the opportunity cost of imposing renewable energy on the world? What are the future repercussions of ignoring our national security and energy independence? The outcomes we’re seeing unfold today demand more analysis and less narrative. Most importantly, they clearly underscore the need for rational and realistic energy policies to make this transition possible over the long-term—a transition where market forces are respected, jobs secured, and liberties preserved—where renewables and fossil fuels work together to provide for our continued prosperity, health, and national security.
Sources:
[1] PJM: Energy Transition in PJM: Resource Retirements, Replacements & Risks (Pages 5 & 6)
[2] North American Electric Reliability Corporation: 2022 Long-Term Reliability Assessment. (Page 9)
[3] Dallas Federal Reserve: Cost of Texas’ 2021 deep freeze justifies weatherization
[4] U.S. Department of Energy National Renewable Energy Laboratory: Renewable Electricity Futures Study, Renewable Electricity Generation and Storage Technology Volume 2/4 (Pages 225, 279, 331)
[5] Dave Merrill, Bloomberg.com: The U.S. Will Need a Lot of Land for a Zero-Carbon Economy
[6] North American Electric Reliability Corporation: 2022 Long-Term Reliability Assessment. (Page 9)
[7] Source: Samantha Gross: Brookings Institute, Renewables, Land Use, and Local Opposition in the United States (Page 3)
[8] Testimony of Mark P. Mills Senior Fellow, Manhattan Institute Before U.S. House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis: “Keeping the Lights On: Strategies for Grid Resilience and Reliability”
[9] IEA: Reliable Supply of Minerals
[10] IER: NERC Reports on Grid Reliability and the Impact of Intermittent Renewables
[11] McKinsey & Company: The net-zero transition. What it would cost, what it could bring. (Page 17)
[12] Mark P. Mills Senior Fellow, Manhattan Institute: The “Energy Transition” Delusion A Reality Reset
[13] Energy Institute: Statistical Review of World Energy 2023. Based on data provided for consumption of Coal, Oil, Natural Gas.