You cannot champion the poor, but support anti-energy policies that perpetuate poverty
Guest post by Paul Driessen
In a scene reminiscent of Colonial Williamsburg, for 16 years Thabo Molubi and his partner had made furniture in South Africa’s outback, known locally as the “veld,” using nothing but hand and foot power. When an electrical line finally reached the area, they installed lights, power saws and drills. Their productivity increased fourfold, and they hired local workers to make, sell and ship far more tables and chairs of much higher quality, thereby also commanding higher prices.
Living standards soared, and local families were able to buy and enjoy lights, refrigerators, televisions, computers and other technologies that Americans and Europeans often take for granted. The area was propelled into the modern era, entrepreneurial spirits were unleashed, new businesses opened, and hundreds of newly employed workers joined the global economy.
People benefited even on the very edge of the newly electrified area. Bheki Vilakazi opened a small shop where people could charge their cell phones before heading into the veld, where instant communication can mean life or death in the event of an accident, automobile breakdown or encounter with wild animals.
Thousands of other African communities want the same opportunities. But for now they must continue to live without electricity, or have it only sporadically and unpredictably a few hours each week. Over 700 million Africans – and some two billion people worldwide – still lack regular, reliable electricity and must rely on toxic wood and dung fires for most or all of their heating and cooking needs.
Mothers with babies strapped on their backs must bend over open fires, breathing poisonous fumes and being struck down by debilitating, often fatal lung diseases. Homes, schools, shops and clinics lack the most rudimentary electrical necessities. Impoverished families must live in mud-and-thatch or cinderblock houses that allow mosquitoes to fly in, feast on human blood and infect victims with malaria. And parents and children must carry and drink untreated water that swarms with bacteria and parasites which cause cholera, diarrhea and river blindness. When the sun goes down, their lives shut down.
The environmental costs are equally high. In Rwanda gorilla habitats are being turned into charcoal, to fuel cooking fires. In Zambia, entrepreneurs harvest trees by the thousands along highways, selling them to motorists heading back to their non-electrified homes in rural areas and even parts of cities. As quickly as First World charities hold plant-a-tree days, Africans cut trees for essential cooking.
If eco-activists have their way, it will be like this for decades to come.
In his DotEarth blog for the New York Times, columnist Andrew Revkin lamented this intolerable situation. “Access to the benefits that come with ample energy trumps concerns about their tiny contribution of greenhouse gas emissions,” he wrote. But despite agreeing with the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow on this central issue, Revkin took issue on several items.
CFACT’s “Stop energy poverty” slogan is clever, he wrote. But where are its “substantive proposals for getting affordable energy” to those who don’t have it? Africa sits on vast deposits of natural gas and liquid condensates. Perhaps CFACT could find a business model that can lead to capturing, instead of flaring, those “orphan fuels,” Revkin suggested, while wondering why the Committee offers solar ovens to a Yucatan village and uses its slogan in part to challenge global warming scares.
Converting orphan fuels to productive uses is a terrific idea. That’s why CFACT opposes restrictions on using these fuels and wants to help find investors and build local support for gas-fired power plants that can electrify and modernize homes and businesses, create jobs, improve health and living standards, purify water, and launch companies that can build modern homes. Non-orphan deposits of oil, “tight oil,” natural gas, shale gas and coal could do likewise.
Unconventional US shale gas reserves alone are now estimated at about 57 trillion cubic meters (2000 trillion cubic feet) – enough for 100 years at current US consumption rates, on top of conventional reserves. Africa almost certainly has large gas, oil, coal and uranium deposits of its own, lying untapped beneath numerous poor countries, waiting to fuel an economic boom – if environmentalists, self-interested companies and government agencies would stop using global warming and other scares to justify their opposition to large-scale generating plants.
Until then, the Committee will continue providing interim measures – solar ovens, used laptops and small solar-powered charging systems – while also training people in computer and business skills, and assisting Yucatan and Ugandan villagers with tree farm and other projects.
All these are akin to the help that first responders provide, before getting disaster victims to hospitals. They are important steps toward individual and community empowerment that comes from having property rights, free enterprise, and full access to modern technologies that improve, enhance and safeguard lives. But none of this is possible without reliable, affordable energy to power those technologies.
“If abundant, affordable, clean energy and water were readily available to everyone, all the other problems would become much easier to solve,” Nobel Laureate Richard Smalley observed. Of course, “clean” does not have to mean non-carbon dioxide emitting, though Mr. Revkin seems reluctant to support energy that comes from fossil fuels, notes CFACT executive director Craig Rucker. “However, you cannot champion the poor, while supporting policies that perpetuate poverty,” Rucker emphasizes.
Modern coal-fired power plants are far cleaner than their predecessors, posing few environmental or health problems, except in the minds and propaganda of eco-activists. They are infinitely cleaner than the open fires that provide pitiful, polluting, often deadly energy for the barest necessities. Gas-fired plants are cleaner still, and safe, modern nuclear plants could also support major economic booms.
To suggest that impoverished nations must worry more about CO2 than about tuberculosis, cholera or malaria is absurd. To tell them their energy options must be limited to expensive, unreliable, insufficient wind and solar power is immoral. To impose anti-hydrocarbon restrictions on poor countries ensures that they will remain poor and diseased, with life expectancies in the low forties.
As Dambisa Moyo and others suggest, it is time for rich Western nations to provide less aid, fewer restrictions – and much more trade, investment and banking expertise and opportunity; business, agricultural and property rights know-how; and energy technologies that will harness and utilize abundant, reliable, affordable hydrocarbon energy. They also need to stop propagating scare stories and imposing restrictions on the use of hybrid and genetically modified seeds to reduce malnutrition, and insecticides to reduce disease.
CFACT’s goal is simple, says Rucker. “Give poor families, communities and nations the same opportunities we had, the same freedoms to chart their destinies, the same rights to create and manage their own wealth, develop their own free and healthy institutions, solve their own environmental and health challenges – and even make their own mistakes along the way.”
Brazil, China, India and Indonesia are not about to stop building new coal-fired power plants; nor are developed countries going to tear their plants down or abandon their fossil fuel-powered vehicles. Africa and other poor regions need to adopt the same attitude – and also seek investors and trade opportunities, rather than just more aid that is often merely life support for corrupt dictators and bureaucrats.
CFACT’s plan is also simple, Rucker adds. Help now with solar ovens, laptops and other first aid. Challenge and change harmful, immoral, lethal policies that limit access to energy and other modern technologies, hobble job creation, impair health and kill millions. And help persuade investors and Third World communities to provide the energy technologies that will make health and prosperity happen.
“We hope Andrew Revkin and millions of other caring people will join us in supporting a global energy quest that advances human progress, while limiting actual environmental risks.”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Nuclear energy seems practical because the nuclear industry is lied to about the actual numbers and consequences of disasters. They really believe that more people died at Chappaquiddick than at Three Mile Island (try 3000) and that this was America’s worst nuclear disaster (worse ones were more successfully covered up).
More extreme is the disaster at Chernobyl. The industry actually believes that a total of 31 people died in that disaster. In fact, 2 died immediately from burns from radiation exposure many times the lethal dose, 29 died in hospitals from an American doctor’s well-publicized efforts to save 31 by bone marrow transpants (he saved two), hundreds of workers were asked to shovel hot radioactive waste down from the roofs of adjacent reactors onto the ground, and they all died in the next few years, helicopter pilots died, and 130,000 military got one fast run to build that sarcophagus–most died within 15 years.
Then there were the civilians. The Soviet Union collapsed a few years later, supposedly from Ronnie Reagan’s excellent leadership of the USA. But some think the collapse was due to health effects from Chernobyl. Life expectancy dropped by 5 years, supposedly due to discouragement from the economic collapse. Was it really due to Chernobyl?
The Soviet Union had over 200 million citizens at the time. Life expectancy drop of five years was a little less than 10%–I will round it up to 10%. So there was an equivalent of 20 million lives lost in the civilian population. But these lives lost are entire-lifetime equivalents, and that undercounts them. It is fairer to double the figure to 40 million.
So we go from “31” to “40 million,” a difference of six orders of magnitude. But this does not count the entirety of Europe, which was so heavily irradiated that there are pastures in Britian unused to this day. Add around another 40 million lives. Then there is the rest of the world, which had much less contamination, and not likely more than another 20 million premature deaths, except in miscarriages, which may have been greater.
All in all, an underestimate of about 7 orders of magnitude in deaths and the collapse of one of the world’s greatest countries. Nor is there the slightest acknowledgement of Dr. Sternglass’ work indicating that brain damage does not have to result in an obviously retarded individual. His work showed that America lost IQ points on its smartest citizens as a result of low-level fallout from bomb testing. This inability of the nuclear industry to face reality prevents them from making the industry truly safe.
That is my second most important reason for opposing Nuclear power except for a few plants in spacefaring nations. The most important reason is that nuclear power is our starship fuel and should not be wasted here on Earth.
Mothers with babies on their backs – yes they do do this. I presume the reason for not putting the baby down is part custom and part no place to leave it safely. Cooking over an open fire is not safe with babies and toddlers in the way.
To illustrate an example of how we in the west completely misunderstand what it is like not having electricity – soccer training during the World Cup last year was disrupted by players not being able to train during cooking time in the early evening. It has to be early evening to cook before the light goes (sunset), and cooking is on commonly on wood or coal open fires. Note this is around Johannesburg, not in the veld.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10650396
Latitude says:
April 2, 2011 at 8:43 am
but Paul….
…what you’re describing is capitalism
====================================
Amen brother.
I agree with everything I have ever read by Mr. Driessen. Electricity is the key to modern prosperity. Sometime last Fall we had a power outage that hit about 7PM and lasted until about 2AM. I took note of how our lives literally shut down. I was cooking on my backyard smoker and suddenly had to use a flashlight to stoke the fire, add wood and check the meat. Then I was stuck without energy to prepare the rest of the meal. TV and internet access was gone. I tried to read by battery powered lantern but the light was inadequate. As I sat in the dark I thought about what it must be like for 1/3 of the planet’s population to live without electricity.
Imagine living a life without illumination and refrigeration. Forget air conditioning, TV and computers. Just think in terms of basic food refrigeration and lighting after dark. Africa has an abundance of natural resources, yet elitists and environmentalists in the West are loathe to let them utilize them. This is cruel and immoral. Electricity enables so many things we in the West take for granted. Many marvel at the increase in life expectancy we have enjoyed over the last century. Some of this is due to modern medicine, to be sure. But MOST of it is due to the development of a sanitation infrastructure (e.g. sewer and septic systems) and the ready availability of potable water for drinking and hygiene. Electricity makes potable water a reality. We’re not doing Africa any favors by dumping billions of dollars in foreign aid to prop up corrupt dictators or maybe stave off starvation for a little while longer. They need to develop their own prosperity and for that they need cheap and abundant electricity…not wind mills and solar panels.
Lady Life Grows says:
April 2, 2011 at 1:07 pm
“Dr. Sternglass’ work indicating that brain damage does not have to result in an obviously retarded individual. His work showed that America lost IQ points on its smartest citizens as a result of low-level fallout from bomb testing. ”
Did the wind carry the fallout from the nuclear bomb tests to Berkeley? 😉
Source
One could be forgiven in thinking, at times, that there is something truly sinister and purposeful in the elite constantly coming up with ways to reduce sub-sahara Africa’s population.
“amicus curiae says:
while I endorse giving them power, the claims re fires being toxic to cook on is crap!”
Did you realize many of the fires used for cooking in Africa are fueled by dung? Which makes you comment truly ironic.
Sorry, should have said “your comment.”
The person who got me interested in the “global warming” issue was Dr. John Christy of the University of Alabama/Huntsville. I heard Dr. Chritsy make a presentation on this issue a number of years ago. In it, he related a story about his activites on a church mission in Africa. He related a story about taking the students he was teaching on a trip in and old school bus over the terrible roads there. He said that whenever they were going to or from the village, the African ladies would stand in the middle of the road to catch a ride on their long journeys to find firewood for cooking. Their journeys got longer every day. John concluded the story by saying: “Life without energy is short and brutal.”
jim hogg says:
April 2, 2011 at 12:30 pm
“Rand mistakenly believed that we are born tabula rasa, and therefore that men could be made better by the best example . . . perhaps a justified error in her time, but it renders a great deal of her thinking – not all of it – obsolete . . . But we can dream . . Capitalism as she saw it would be a very fine system indeed . . . but it’s an ideal that’ll never be realised because of human nature. ”
——————————————————————————-
The crony capitalism she railed against then is exactly what we have now. GE, General Motors, Goldman Sachs and others feed at the bailout trough and cozy up to the regulators who can make or break them. The EPA threatens to take “command and control” of the economy through its green house gas “endangerment” finding because Congress had the audacity to rebuff Obama’s cap and trade scheme. There is nothing wrong with capitalism and it would work quite satisfactorily if it hadn’t been subjected to a shotgun wedding with government in the aftermath of World War II.
“The freedom that capitalism depends on tends to attract and enrich the greedy, dishonest, and outright exploitative, usually at the expense of the hard working, trusting and honest. ”
The power that governments wield for the ostensible purpose of restraining greedy, dishonest, and outright exploitative businessmen tends to attract and enrich greedy, dishonest, and outright exploitative government functionaries and their greedy, dishonest, and outright exploitative partners in business, labor, and academia.
Once you’ve created a government agency to regulate evil businessmen, those same evil businessmen will have a great incentive to gain control of that agency and use it to prevent the very competition that is a free market’s best defense against “exploitative” behavior. If it’s true that a majority of the people support establishing such an agency, it need not have the power of government; the Seal of Approval of your Omnibus Watchdog League would be voluntarily sought by businessmen who want a good reputation. Further, competing certification agencies could offer different criteria upon which to award their honors, allowing consumers to choose which are important to them.
“To suggest that impoverished nations must worry more about CO2 than about tuberculosis, cholera or malaria is absurd. To tell them their energy options must be limited to expensive, unreliable, insufficient wind and solar power is immoral. To impose anti-hydrocarbon restrictions on poor countries ensures that they will remain poor and diseased, with life expectancies in the low forties.”
This is the danger we face with the manic CAGW scientists/activists – their influence on “policy makers” will ultimately lead to millions of poor people starving and dying…
How many times have I seen this quote or ones similiarto it.
“They also need to stop propagating scare stories and imposing restrictions on the use of hybrid and genetically modified seeds to reduce malnutrition, and insecticides to reduce disease.
”
Europe bans Gmo crops to protect it farmers from competition not because they are dangerous.
Golden rice to increase vitamin A in diets is a wonder crop to me.
Just more silly barriers to a better future for the world is all I can say.
I totally endorse what Frank K. has posted.
Brilliantly put.
We have to hope that Thorium can come to the rescue of Electric Power in the near future. With Fukushima rapidly heading in the direction of Chernoble, we desperately need a viable alternative. For once, let us root for the Chinese to be successful.
otherwise, nuclear power is dead as a dorrnail.
sdollarfan says:
April 2, 2011 at 9:09 am
President Obama should go on national TV and/or before Congress and tell them
exactly what Mr. Driessen is saying in this piece. Unfortunately, Obama is a green Lefty himself, so this isn’t going to happen. That makes Obama part of the problem — and a significant part of the tragedy.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Quite true, but not excatly. While what you said about the president is true, the mainstrean media is more to blame. This has been hijacked by the left, the ex-communists in europe and their cronies in the US who keep spreading the lie. Furthemore even educators of today are left wingers, extreme greenies who are indoctrinating our children against the old established moral values and scientific truth, replacing these with a new (im)morality and junk science.
I have always believed that good always triumphs over evil ultimately, as it has always done (nazism, communism etc) and it will be the case in this global swindle called CAGW, a lie of epic proportions and as malignant as Carl Marx’ own lie.
Good is that little bit more powerful than evil. It’s a universal law, albeit unwritten.
this is the first time I hear of large fossil fuel reserves in africa. but I know one thing for sure: it will not be the locals who will get this gas out of the ground. this is verysad but unfortunately true.
Then there were the civilians. The Soviet Union collapsed a few years later, supposedly from Ronnie Reagan’s excellent leadership of the USA. But some think the collapse was due to health effects from Chernobyl. Life expectancy dropped by 5 years, supposedly due to discouragement from the economic collapse. Was it really due to Chernobyl?
So much bollox, so little time to refute it. I will just stick to the obvious point.
The drop in life expectancy in the old USSR was evenly spread. If Chernobyl was the cause then there should have been no drop in Volgagrad say, which is a long way upwind. However life expectancy in Poland, which is directly downwind, should have been enormously effected, but wasn’t. You’re just making stuff up.
Mack Headley at CW can cut a dovetail by hand about 4 times faster and tighter than I can with a router.
[snip]
If we want check out a hint of what it is like to go without life extending electricity we should have an Earth WEEK. We’d end up getting a sense of what life without elec and I’m sure the the outrage would be such that we could kiss today’s rendition of the environmental movement goodbye.
To paraphrase Voltaire: “Let us reserve judgment on Capitalism until we have seen it practiced.”
Mr. Driessen,
Thank you for the informative and uplifting post. CFACT’s goals are admirable, and their phased approach quite practical.
“All these are akin to the help that first responders provide, before getting disaster victims to hospitals. They are important steps toward individual and community empowerment that comes from having property rights, free enterprise, and full access to modern technologies that improve, enhance and safeguard lives. But none of this is possible without reliable, affordable energy to power those technologies.”
A key issue that has to be the timing of property rights, or working around known shortcomings. Many parts of Africa are a study in the “tragedy of the commons”. The argument that electricity has to come first may or may not be correct–let’s assume it is. But setting up modern, efficient electrical generation plants assumes a high level of infrastructure, as well as someone with the money and will to maintain it. The people in Village A and Village B may not come to a common agreement about who maintains which lines, especially if there are family or tribal issues between them.
CFACT may want to look into options to phase in the utilities even more gradually. The Navy has a possible solution; MUSE units (Mobile Utilities Support Equipment). They are diesel-run generators with sub-stations that could easily keep villages or parts of a city running on electricity. Moderately educated individuals with mechanical skills could be trained to run MUSE through existing classes. It is easier to transport diesel in trucks than it is to pipe natural gas or bring coal in by train.
There are real advantages to this approach. The distribution lines are by definition local; easier to maintain, and the operator can’t very well place blame for outages on vague entities far away in the capital. Small-scale power generation is what parts of Iraq fell back on during the low-scale civil war a few years ago. It’s not clean or environmentally low-impact, but people had at least some access to power and that is important!!
Speaking of which, there have been some negative comments about BRIC countries. Whatever their motives may be, it is undeniable that they have recent experience turning from undeveloped to developed. Anyone involves in rural electrification in the US, for example, would have retired at least 40 years ago. Don’t discount the contributions of experience; work to harness the enlightened self-interest of these people who have recently done the same.
Just once I’d like to see the tree huggers give up their technology, kinda/sorta walk the walk that hey want everybody else to walk. Who was that maniac singer woman that wanted everybody to use only one square of toilet paper per trip to the john. I bet you a dollar to a doughnut that she uses what she pleases. These people are nothing more than elitist snobs. “Do as I say not as I do.”