The Biden Administration Ever More Delusional on Energy

From the MANATTAN CONTRARIAN

Francis Menton

Three and a half years into the Biden Administration, and to an ordinary citizen on the ground it might seem like not that much has changed as to energy. Despite hundreds of government actions and initiatives in an all-of-government regulatory onslaught to transform the energy economy, the important things have been remarkably stable. Production of oil and gas are actually up, and prices increases have been relatively modest — far less than one might have anticipated from the extreme regulatory hostility to production. The percentage of what is called “primary energy” (that is, energy for everything, not just electricity) coming from fossil fuels has remained nearly unchanged. EIA data here for 2022 (latest I can find) show about 79% of U.S. primary energy from fossil fuels, barely changed since Biden took office, and indeed very stable for decades.

Perhaps this situation of stable energy production and consumption results because it reflects what markets and consumers want and need to satisfy their demand for energy. So do you think that the hyperactive regulators might just relax and let the consumers have what they want?

Unfortunately, that is not how this works. Even as the energy producers and consumers have figured out endless workarounds to avoid the fossil fuel suppression that the Bidenauts attempt to impose, the little regulatory tyrants have been busy preparing new bouts of punitive restrictions. Last week saw a round of some of the most sweeping regulatory edicts yet. The regulators really plan to put the people in their place this time.

In the new round, the regulators have gotten farther and farther away from anything realistic, anything consistent with the laws of physics or thermodynamics, anything that might actually work. We are now well into the world of fantasy and delusion.

On last Thursday (April 25), the Administration, via the EPA, announced a suite of no fewer than four final rules “to Reduce Pollution from Fossil Fuel-Fired Power Plants.” Essentially, this is the replacement for the Obama Administration’s so-called “Clean Power Plan,” that ordered a complete re-do of the electricity generation system to gradually shutter fossil fuel plants and replace them with unworkable “renewables.” That Plan got struck down by the Supreme Court in June 2022 for being far beyond anything the EPA was authorized to do under its statutes.

So here is the new Rule covering the comparable subject. The title is “New Source Performance Standards for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from New, Modified, and Reconstructed Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric Generating Units; Emission Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Existing Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric Generating Units; and Repeal of the Affordable Clean Energy Rule.” The document is 1020 pages long because, hey, we’re the EPA, and anything worth doing around here deserves a Rule of at least a thousand pages.

And how does this new Rule achieve the goal of reducing “greenhouse gas emissions”? You could probably spend all week trying to read the thing without ever figuring that out. EPA’s press release makes the following claim:

“EPA’s final Clean Air Act standards for existing coal-fired and new natural gas-fired power plants limit the amount of carbon pollution covered sources can emit, based on proven and cost-effective control technologies that can be applied directly to power plants.”

And what is the “proven and cost-effective control mechanism” they are talking about? The AP summarizes it here in a few words:

Coal-fired power plants would be forced to capture smokestack emissions or shut down under a rule issued Thursday by the Environmental Protection Agency.

It’s the “capture of smokestack emissions” — otherwise known as carbon capture and storage, or CCS. I had a post last August at the time this Rule had been proposed and comments were being received. In my August post I highlighted some of the comments, including those from the states of Ohio and West Virginia. Those comments made mincemeat of any possible claim that CCS technology was either “proven” or “cost-effective.” Not only has it never been proven, but it’s impossible for it ever to work economically. There are many long quotes from comments in that post. Here are just a few.

From the Ohio comment, page 4:

A study of 263 carbon-capture-and-sequestration projects undertaken between 1995 and 2018 found that the majority failed and 78% of the largest projects were cancelled or put on hold.  After the study was published in May 2021, the only other coal plant with a carbon-capture-and-sequestration attachment in the world, Petra Nova, shuttered after facing 367 outages in its three years of operation. . . . [T]his [SaskPower] facility is the world’s only [remaining] operating commercial carbon capture facility at a coal-fired power plant.   And it has never achieved its maximum capacity.  It also battled significant technical issues throughout 2021—to the point that the plant idled the equipment for weeks at a time.  As a result, the plant achieved less than 37% carbon capture that year despite having an official target of 90% . . . . 

From the West Virginia comment, pages 24 – 25:

Take efficiency to start. CCS units run on power, too. An owner can get that power from the plant itself. But this approach makes the plant less efficient by increasing its “parasitic load”—and CCS more than triples combustion turbines’ normal parasitic load. . . . This is the cause the Wyoming study analyzed that showed installing CCS technology would devastate plants’ heat rates and lower net plant efficiency by 36%.

There is endless more of same. The fact is that CCS technology is neither “proven” nor “cost-effective.” It is nowhere after 30 years of trying because it cannot be done economically. It cannot be done economically because it is, in effect, a war against the Second Law of Thermodynamics. To capture more and more of the CO2 from the plant takes more and more of the plant’s output of energy, until in the limiting case you use all the energy of the plant and still some small amount of the CO2 escapes. The whole idea of CCS is to avoid having the disorder of the universe increase by the method of putting sufficient energy into trying. Won’t ever work. See also, perpetual motion machines.

Well, the sensible comments have all been rejected and EPA has just gone ahead and done what it was always planning to do, which is to order up something that can’t ever work economically and can only result in forcing the closure of an energy system that works without any idea of something realistic to replace it.

The deadlines for this start around 2030. Most likely between now and then either the Supreme Court will strike this down, or we’ll get a Republican administration that will sweep it all away. In the meantime we have completely ignorant and tyrannical regulators ordering up an energy system that can’t possibly work and heedless of the enormous destruction that they will likely cause if not stopped.

And that’s only part of what these fools were up to last week on the energy front. Here from Wednesday (April 24) is a “Fact Sheet” issued by the White House on another totally delusional effort: “Biden-⁠Harris Administration Sets First-Ever National Goal of Zero-Emissions Freight Sector, Announces Nearly $1.5 Billion to Support Transition to Zero-Emission Heavy-duty Vehicles.”

I’ve got some news for them: the freight transportation sector (trucks and railroads) is not going to convert to electricity any time soon. At least this announcement was not a regulation mandating the conversion, but only the supposed setting of a “national goal,” with no idea of how it could possibly be achieved or at what cost. The $1.5 billion mentioned is an irrelevant rounding error of a figure that maybe could buy 10,000 new electric trucks (in a sector with at least 3 million existing non-electric ones), and the 10,000 trucks would be mostly useless for the purposes in question.

These people become more and more detached from reality with each passing day. They seem to have no idea how much damage they are doing, and they don’t care a bit. Somehow they have convinced themselves that they are “saving the planet,” when if they could do even a little arithmetic they would know that their efforts cannot possibly move the needle on that effort. It’s just another week in the Biden Administration energy clown show.

4.8 17 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
46 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom Halla
May 4, 2024 10:11 am

All anyone can do is try to make sure the people around Biden lose power, as several superlative metaphors come to mind—having their heads so far up their @sses they see teeth is one.

Joe Crawford
Reply to  Tom Halla
May 6, 2024 2:47 pm

One problem with HFUA syndrome is you lose sight of your surroundings. Your vision of the world becomes somewhat limited by the brown fog that appears to engulf you :<)

MarkW
May 4, 2024 10:11 am

It’s not that they don’t know how much damage they are doing. It’s that they don’t care how much damage they are doing.
Saving the world from CO2 and making the world safe for socialism are the only things they care about.

purecolorartist@gmail.com
Reply to  MarkW
May 5, 2024 1:42 am

All the people in the EPA and in the Biden administration should be locked in a room and be made to watch “Climate The Movie”, including Biden, John Kerry and Al Gore!

I posted that movie on Twitter to random people and they watched it, and liked it and a lot reposted it ! ….It’s a real eye opener for a lot of people ! I think it could actually change some minds.

Reply to  purecolorartist@gmail.com
May 5, 2024 2:55 am

All the people in the EPA and in the Biden administration should be locked in a room and

the keys thrown away.

Reply to  purecolorartist@gmail.com
May 5, 2024 3:17 am

Yes, everyone should see “Climate the Movie. It shows the truth and puts things in perspective about the Earth’s climate and weather.

Unfortunately, fanatics don’t like it when their False Reality Bubble is threatened, so Climate Alarmists will reject the movie, since it shows they are living a lie, but the average person will get insight into the issue and will realize they have nothing to fear from CO2..

Corrigenda
Reply to  MarkW
May 7, 2024 5:32 am

To me the real worry is that the outcome of the nonsensical belief in human caused climate change is simply a tax on the world other than India and Chins – the only two countries whose pollution could even have an effect.

J Boles
May 4, 2024 11:03 am

Welcome to a dystopian future of no energy (A.I. video of PF welcome to the machine)
Pink Floyd – Welcome To The Machine (AI Music Video) (youtube.com)

Reply to  J Boles
May 4, 2024 12:52 pm

Wow! Reminds me of a bad acid trip I once had- back in, I think ’70.

sherro01
Reply to  J Boles
May 4, 2024 7:33 pm

J Boles,

Thank you for this excellent, sophisticated demo of AI in video creation. Recommended that readers here view it.

I am concerned that the theme represents a mind poison that I loosely term “modern DDT” for Dread, Depression, Threat or optionally Drugs, Degradation, Terror. Why did the video authors choose such a horrible theme?

Then I recalled the most recent still photo I had taken, which was last Friday. It was of a slab of dressed pine timber about 8 inches by 2 1/2. The photo, below, has not been adjusted in any way, it is completely original from Nature.

It reminded me that the expression of nature is a permanent refuge for those troubled by mind manipulation of the type that the AI video is capable. It is voluntary for you and me to switch off from sad images to enjoy pure, simple, natural material that has no embedded theme to addle the mind.
Geoff S

comment image

Eng_Ian
Reply to  sherro01
May 5, 2024 12:53 am

You should have flipped it over. The bite is worse than the bark.

Rud Istvan
May 4, 2024 11:03 am

‘Biden admin more detached from reality with each passing day’. Yup.

It isn’t just that the EPA thinks that CCS is ‘proven and cost effective’ when it isn’t.
Or that electrifying the heavy freight sector is somehow feasible.

DOE just (officially on their website) rewrote Title 9 (which prohibits sex discrimination in any federally funded educational institution) to “discrimination based on sex, including sexual orientation and gender identity”. Six states have already sued, and four more announced they will simply ignore it.

DOJ illicit Special Counsel Smith indicted Trump over J6, conveniently ignoring presidential immunity for official acts. That case was heard by SCOTUS April 25. Reality will bite before the end of the current SCOTUS term. A2§3 requires the President ‘take care the Laws be faithfully executed.’ Challenging an obviously stolen election is just that.

DOD announced that climate change was its biggest concern, not Russia or China. Meanwhile, its ship, submarine, and strategic missile replacement programs are many years late, while the newish LCS ships are being retired because they don’t work.

DHS established then was quickly forced to abandon its ‘Disinformation Governance Board’. So it then established an ‘Intelligence Experts Group’, which a federal court just this week ordered abolished— with all its records turned over to America First Legal. (The groups members included many who signed the false ‘Hunter Biden laptop is disinformation’ intelligence community letter.)

Sort of what one gets from an administration headed by a cognitively impaired permanent politician.

Reply to  Rud Istvan
May 4, 2024 12:42 pm

‘…while the newish LCS ships are being retired because they don’t work.’

Maybe they’ll bring back galleys, which will also provide useful employment for many of the regime’s enemies.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  Frank from NoVA
May 4, 2024 1:33 pm

The Littoral Combat Ship program shows everything wrong with DOD, who thinks climate change is their big problem.
They had a first ship competition between two designs, a monohull and a trimaran. Because of politics, the Navy chose both! Bad idea.
The monohull Freedom class propulsion system was mis designed, so the combining gear breaks. So the ships have to limp along after. So those are already retired since useless once the thing breaks.
The LCS was supposed to be outfitted with any of three modular interchangeable weapons systems depending on mission. Pretty idea, but didn’t work out in reality. One never worked (asw), and only one of three worked reliably. So the Independence class is being retired for lack of multi mission armament fitness.
The new frigate class supposed to replace them is several years behind schedule. And that is just part of the Navy.

Reply to  Rud Istvan
May 4, 2024 2:18 pm

I remember Rush Limbaugh saying something to the effect that the purpose of the military (when called to arms) was, “to kill people and break things”.
If our current military isn’t equipped and trained to do that, then it will be OUR people killed and OUR things broken.
(Assuming Brandon hasn’t already surrendered “our things” to the enemy.)

CD in Wisconsin
Reply to  Gunga Din
May 4, 2024 4:17 pm

(Assuming Brandon hasn’t already surrendered “our things” to the enemy.)

****

He did when he pulled U.S. troops out of Afghanistan after taking office. He left behind something $8 billion in U.S. military vehicles, equipment and weaponry for the Taliban.

Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
May 5, 2024 3:45 am

Biden gave up the Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan. How much was that worth? How much did the United States spend on that?

All Biden’s advisors wanted him to keep the air base. Biden didn’t care, he wanted to wash his hands of another war.

Biden portrays himself as compassionate and then throws millions of people to the wolves without batting an eye lid. He did it in Vietnam and he did it in Afghanistan.

Biden can’t deal with murderous dictators. He appeases or runs away every time.

Biden handed Bagram over to the Chicoms.

I guess that’s why the Chicoms were paying the Bidens. They expected favorable treatment for the money, and they get it every day from Joe Biden.

Rick C
Reply to  Rud Istvan
May 4, 2024 2:12 pm

The eco-zealots at EPA are not concerned that the technology they mandate does not work – the point is to destroy the disfavored industry. They just keep changing tactics when the courts strike down unlawful rules. It’s been at least 30 years since EPA employed any competent scientists or engineers. The are all activists or DEI hires now. EPA did decent work when they cleaned up air and water pollution in the 70s and 80s. These days they’re just far left activists.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  Rick C
May 4, 2024 2:55 pm

EPA is an example of why most agencies when created by Congress should automatically by law also have some reasonable but hard sunset provision to prevent mission creep. Sunset works either way. If agency original mission accomplished, no longer needed so gone. If agency mission not accomplished, useless so gone.

Of course there are exceptions, like the FDA. Will always be new foods and new drugs. Or FBI, since will always have new criminals.

Reply to  Rud Istvan
May 4, 2024 6:45 pm

‘Or FBI, since will always have new criminals.’

I can see keeping the labs and records, e.g., fingerprints, state crime statistics, etc., but the entire Stasi-like mission has to go. Of course, they’ve had dirt on everyone since Bonnie & Clyde, so that probably won’t happen.

sherro01
Reply to  Rick C
May 4, 2024 5:40 pm

Rick C,
I dispute that the early EPA cleaned up air and water pollution in the 70s and. 80s. I was there at the time, but in Australia with our EPA. One can make a good case that polluters were on a normal path to cleaning up, when they earned enough money to do so. These polluters were mostly not ogres, but ordinary family people who liked clean rivers, etc.
If anything, the EPA caused real harm by insisting that money be spent on cleanups before the polluters were ready. The money had to come from reduced production and delayed rates of normal corporate growth.
EPAs everywhere seem to have assumed a saintliness from ridding the earth of rapacious beings, without even considering that progress would happen whether or not the EPA existed. All the EPA has none is fiddle with corporate spending timing.
Geoff S

Reply to  sherro01
May 4, 2024 6:56 pm

Good point. For example, the early oil industry only used a fraction of the barrel for lamp oil – the rest got dumped into the local river. What stopped the dumping was not the law, but the fact that that the rest of the barrel could be profitably converted into many other useful products.

Reply to  Rud Istvan
May 5, 2024 3:28 am

“Reality will bite before the end of the current SCOTUS term. A2§3 requires the President ‘take care the Laws be faithfully executed.’ Challenging an obviously stolen election is just that.”

I think the Supreme Court will announce their decision by the end of June, if not before.

And, even if Trump had no presidential immunity, he still didn’t do anything illegal on January 6, or by looking into the election details of various States. Elections have been challenged in the past. It’s not illegal.

DStayer
May 4, 2024 11:29 am

When you realize that Communist China, who paid and owns the Biden Family and many other Deep Staters, is the true beneficiary of these insane policies it makes perfect sense. They get to make a lot of money on selling “green” technology to us, while the entirely unnecessary pursuit of this “green energy” will cripple America’s energy infrastructure, bankrupt the American taxpayer, and as a result subjugate the U.S. to the Cabal of Communist China, The World Economic Forum and the U.N.. It is Marxism, not the environment, that today’s EPA wants to protect!

Corrigenda
May 4, 2024 11:42 am

Exactly so. Real science is being ignored. Not one serious forecast of climate has ever come to pass. Richard Feynman was always clear. If an hypothesis di not agree with experiment or observation then it is WRONG.

May 4, 2024 11:45 am

Tangentially related is the EPA OOOO or quad-oh rules limiting methane emissions. Pipelines have big valves. 30, 40, 48 even 60 inches+. These valves are there it isolate sections of the pipeline in case of an emergency, but typically spend pretty much their entire lifetime open. They are operated with gas/hydraulic operators that use the high pressure pipeline gas to drive hydraulics to open/close the valve. When they operate they release a little methane into the atmosphere. Remember, they almost never operate. Quad-oh is forcing the replacement of these actuators – 10s of thousands of them – at a cost of upwards ok $100k each to “reduce methane emissions”.

I would say that EPA has gone nuts, but they have always been that way. They’re just able to be more in your face with it now.

Reply to  Fraizer
May 4, 2024 1:36 pm

I visited a machining plant that had huge Mazak machining center to turn large solid blocks of stainless steel into the housing for pipeline valves.

Unfortunately the city the plant is in has decided to go green so I have no idea how that plant can operate nor the heat treat plant also located there.

Curious George
Reply to  Fraizer
May 4, 2024 4:16 pm

America has been taken over by parasites.

Corrigenda
May 4, 2024 11:55 am

The madness of the Democrats continues.

purecolorartist@gmail.com
Reply to  Corrigenda
May 5, 2024 1:54 am

One way to get rid of a lot of these damaging energy regulations is to elect Trump in 2024, He did it before, and he’ll do it again, and he has learned a lot during these last 3 Biden years about what to do and what not to do !

62empirical
May 4, 2024 12:13 pm

There is a simple and easy way to stop these stupid regulations. Pass laws requiring that any regulation or law that affects the country as a whole be tested first in the Washington DC metro area first. Once Congress has to work by candlelight (wax is a renewable source, right?), that will be the end of it.

Reply to  62empirical
May 4, 2024 2:42 pm

Better yet any regulation that has the effect of a “law”, must be approved by Congress and resubmitted for approval every 3 years.
Take the power away from the bureaucrats.

3x2
May 4, 2024 12:43 pm

If the European experience is anything to go by then no scheme, no matter how delusional, is out of the question.

Although the subsidies, grants and real costs are well hidden they eventually appear at the user end. People are starting to notice and the constant gaslighting (“its gas prices … It’s …) is wearing a little thin

Richard Greene
May 4, 2024 2:39 pm

The Jumpin’ Joe Bribe’em maladministration
is delusional on every subject.

Why would they make an exception for energy?
They are consistently deluded.

Joe Bribe’em does not know which way is up.
He is a fake president who got his job with a fake election.

His maladministraion uses a fake climate crisis to justify a fake Nut Zero engineering project

The goal of that fake project is leftist fascism and that devious plan is working well.

Climate change is just a trojan horse for gaining political power and control.

Reply to  Richard Greene
May 4, 2024 7:02 pm

Batting 1.000 with this one, Richard!

David Goeden
May 4, 2024 3:18 pm

The US Gov. has become the toilet bowl of America and the biggest turds have floated to the top!

1saveenergy
Reply to  David Goeden
May 4, 2024 4:28 pm

Out of +300 million, the biggest turds have floated to the top & will fight to become the top turd later this year.

God help America !!

antigtiff
May 4, 2024 3:18 pm

Joke Biden belongs in prison – not the White House……….but he will probably avoid prosecution by pleading senility.

Reply to  antigtiff
May 5, 2024 4:03 am

Joe Biden is a traitor to his nation. He does belong in jail. Along with a number of other Democrats in the Obama and Biden administrations, who have weaponized the federal government for political and monetary benefit to themselves.

May 4, 2024 7:45 pm

see https://brilliantlightpower.com/

They show a new source of user created directly on site energy. This has been verified world wide as it came out of the hunt for COLD FUSION. That was never found but alchemy occurred. That showed that a controlled voltage through a combo of HYDOGEN, METAL CATALYS and PLASMA was sensitive producing LIGHT & HEAT which an robust light>Electricity commercial chip could provide! BLP have succeeded after 20yrs and +100$Mega USD.

The world wont be able to ignore that which will provide transport, homes, commerce, farms and the rest with onsite electricity without a grid or battery unless a functional necessity like temporary peak consumption.

Reply to  KevOB
May 4, 2024 7:47 pm

I forgot to add a source (past years) \https://e-catworld.com/

Reply to  KevOB
May 4, 2024 8:22 pm

LOL.. get back to us when you have one constantly supplying say, a hundred MW of power to the grid…

Otherwise you are just a gullible shill for a con.. !!

Coeur de Lion
May 5, 2024 12:42 am

Surely it’s carbon dioxide not ‘carbon’? Actually I’m delighted to see the decarbonisation of road haulage discussed. Here in UK I’ve been bombarding my Member of Parliament about her plans as clearly electric cars are futile unless one also deals with haulage. Our economy in this little tight island runs on white van man. Are they to be put out of business by EV costs?

Frank Pouw
May 5, 2024 4:19 am

Here’s my proposal for the next phase of this game. The fossil fuel producers, either individually or through trade associations, should pick a state, logically a relatively small one (Vermont might be a good place to start), and go to the legislature with this proposition: Ban us! Make the sale or use of fossil fuels in your state illegal, starting at some early date, like for example tomorrow. We will then withdraw. And your citizens will then find out whether they prefer life with fossil fuels, or without them.
In other words, stop being such pansies. It’s time to call their bluff.

observa
May 5, 2024 6:03 am

The document is 1020 pages long because, hey, we’re the EPA, and anything worth doing around here deserves a Rule of at least a thousand pages.

Oxygenated carbon is worthy of a voluminous tome any day and men shall write sonnets about it.

Dave Andrews
May 5, 2024 7:08 am

According to the IEA

“CCUS deployment remained relatively flat in the last decade and this has led to progressive downward revisions in the role of CCUS in the IEA updated Net Zero Emissions (NZE) Scenario”

“Current project pipeline would only meet just over one third of the deployment needed by 2030”

“Operating CCUS projects are largely concentrated in lowest cost areas such as natural gas processing. In contrast around three quarters of capture by 2050 in the NZE scenario are still at demonstration or prototype scale.”

“For all CCUS applications economic viability remains a significant hurdle as costs can be prohibitively high compared to unabated technologies. In addition long lead times for project development and implementation can further impede progress, particularly relating to CO2 storage development”

IEA ‘CCUS Policies and Business Models: building a commercial market’ (Oct. 2023)

Verified by MonsterInsights