“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that” there is no energy transition!

Guest “Make the EIA Great Again!” by David Middleton

July 2, 2025

How has U.S. energy use changed since 1776?

U.S. energy consumption (1776-2024)

Data source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Monthly Energy Review
Data values: Primary Energy Consumption by Source and Estimated primary energy consumption in the United States, selected years, 1635–1945


In 2024, the United States consumed about 94 quadrillion British thermal units (quads) of energy, a 1% increase from 2023, according to our Monthly Energy Review. Fossil fuels—petroleum, natural gas, and coal—accounted for 82% of total U.S. energy consumption in 2024. Nonfossil fuel energy—from renewables and nuclear energy—accounted for the other 18%. Petroleum remained the most-consumed fuel in the United States, as it has been for the past 75 years, and nuclear energy consumption exceeded coal consumption for the first time ever.

When the Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776, wood, a renewable energy source, was the largest source of energy in the United States. Used for heating, cooking, and lighting, wood remained the largest U.S. energy source until the late 1800s, when coal consumption became more common. Wood energy is still consumed, mainly by industrial lumber and paper plants that burn excess wood waste to generate electricity.

Coal was the largest source of U.S. energy for about 65 years, from 1885 until 1950. Early uses of coal included many purposes that are no longer common, such as in stoves for home heating and in engines for trains and ships. Since the 1960s, nearly all coal consumed in the United States has been for electricity generation.

Petroleum has been the most-consumed source of energy in the United States since 1950. Petroleum products such as motor gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, and propane are commonly used across all sectors of the U.S. economy, from transportation to industrial chemicals and plastics.

Natural gas is the second-largest source of U.S. energy consumption, as it has been most years since it surpassed coal in 1958. Natural gas was once considered a waste byproduct of crude oil production but now has become a common energy source for heating and electricity generation.

Early use of water to power grist, lumber, and other milling operations is not well quantified and not included in our data, but such mills were common throughout early U.S. history. The first industrial use of hydropower to generate electricity in the United States was to power lamps at a chair factory in Grand Rapids, Michigan, in 1880. The world’s first hydroelectric power plant to sell electricity to the public opened on the Fox River near Appleton, Wisconsin, in 1882.

Other forms of renewable energy did not become significant contributors to U.S. energy production until more recently. In 2016, biofuels—including the fuel ethanol mixed in motor gasoline—became the most-consumed U.S. renewable energy source.

U.S. renewable energy consumption (1776-2024)

Data source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Monthly Energy Review
Data values: Renewable Energy Consumption by Source and Estimated primary energy consumption in the United States, selected years, 1635–1945


Electricity generation from some zero-carbon sources, such as wind and solar, has increased rapidly in recent years, while generation from others, such as hydropower and nuclear, has remained relatively flat. In 2022, U.S. energy consumption from renewable sources surpassed nuclear energy for the first time since 1984, and in 2023, renewables surpassed coal for the first time since around the early 1880s. The United States now consumes more energy from wind and solar sources individually than from hydropower.

To compare different forms of energy, we convert to common units of heat, called British thermal unitsAppendix A of our Monthly Energy Review has the conversion factors that we use for each energy source, and Appendix E explains how we convert noncombustible renewable energy sources.

Principal contributor: Mickey Francis

Tags: consumption/demandcoaloil/petroleumnatural gashydroelectricbiofuelsnuclear

US EIA

We never transitioned from wood to coal. In 2024, we consumed as much energy from wood as we did in ~1900.

We simply add new energy sources on top of legacy sources.

The notion that we are transitioning from fossil fuels to renewables is patently absurd.

Guess what? We really did have an energy transition. From 1860 to 1920, we literally did transition from renewables to fossil fuels.

I stand corrected. If I have to explain sarcasm, there’s no point in being sarcastic.

Happy Fourth of July! Happy 249th birthday to the USA!

In Congress, July 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.-

[…]

National Archives

“Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” powered by fossil fuels!

Life Expectancy: Our World in Data, Energy Consumption: Bjorn Lomborg, 2020 and CO2
(Wood for TreesMacFarling Meure et al., 2006)
5 19 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

47 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Scissor
July 4, 2025 6:36 am

Believe it or not, we will always need carbon. Happy 4th of July!

Reply to  Scissor
July 4, 2025 6:44 am

We are, after all, a carbon based life form.
Every carbon atom in your body is derived
from CO2 in the atmosphere.

Reply to  Steve Case
July 4, 2025 9:58 am

“Every carbon atom in your body is derived from CO2 in the atmosphere.”

That’s rich, but not obvious. First, elemental carbon is formed during the explosions (“nova”) of first- and second-generation stars. Some of that elemental carbon is not only bound up exclusively with oxygen (forming CO2) but also with many other elements, resulting in minerals such as calcium carbonate and gases such as carbon monoxide, methane, ethane and propane and organic carbon-ring compounds such as benzene and toluene.

Among these methane, ethane and benzene have been been found to exist in planetary atmospheres and in interstellar nebula.

Please provide a reference that cites atmospheric CO2 is the only source of bioavailable carbon in the human body,

Ex-KaliforniaKook
Reply to  ToldYouSo
July 4, 2025 10:27 am

I think he gets that from the fact that we eat vegetables (which obviously use CO2) and meat (which eat vegetation and other meat). Even alcohol (which hopefully isn’t a major part of your calories) still comes primarily from grains. Even charcoal (an accident on a coal barbie?) is the result of ancient flora and fauna.

Can you think of a source of carbon that we ingest is not originally from flora/fauna?

Scissor
Reply to  Ex-KaliforniaKook
July 4, 2025 10:43 am

I can think of natural gas derived ethanol and acetic acid that gets comingled into the food supply chain, in addition to other minor amounts of ingested carbon from pharmaceuticals and supplements of similar source, as well as mushrooms that incorporate terrestrial (not atmospheric) carbon. I know people have ingested diamonds to smuggle them.

These days, there are a number of fermentation products that get into our diet and often the feedstock for these processes is natural gas derived.

Nevertheless, it would be safe to say that close to all of the carbon in our bodies had cycled through the atmosphere.

IAMPCBOB
Reply to  Scissor
July 5, 2025 1:02 pm

All part of the Carbon cycle. On a long enough time scale…

Reply to  Ex-KaliforniaKook
July 4, 2025 2:38 pm

“Can you think of a source of carbon that we ingest is not originally from flora/fauna?”

Sure, but don’t just trust me. Try this reputable source:
“Carbon dioxide (CO2) has been present in the atmosphere since the Earth condensed from a ball of hot gases following its formation from the explosion of a huge star about five billion years ago.
“At that time the atmosphere was mainly composed of nitrogen, CO2 and water vapour, which seeped through cracks in the solid surface. A very similar composition emerges from volcanic eruptions today.
“As the planet cooled further some of the water vapour condensed out to form oceans and they dissolved a portion of the CO2 but it was still present in the atmosphere in large amounts.”
— Professsor Joanna Haigh from Imperial College London, as reported at https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-41671770

And this one also:
“The evolution of Earth’s atmosphere has undergone significant changes over its 4.6-billion-year history, primarily driven by processes such as volatile outgassing, chemical evolution, and biological activity. Initially, the atmosphere formed from gases released from Earth’s interior, consisting mostly of water vapor, carbon dioxide, and sulfur dioxide, among others. Over time, the outgassed water vapor condensed to create oceans, while carbon dioxide reacted with ocean minerals to form carbonate rocks, leading to its diminished presence in the atmosphere.”
https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/earth-and-atmospheric-sciences/atmospheres-evolution
(my bold emphasis added)

So yes, there is quite of bit of CO2 present on/in Earth that did not originate from plants and was captured within the solid Earth (not in its atmosphere) during Earth’s formation . . . some of that primordial, abiotic CO2 is still escaping from within the Earth and entering the atmosphere for the first time even today via volcanoes, undersea thermal vents and from deep primordial ocean waters. And, of course, humans consume water from underground reservoirs that undoubtedly contain some amount of that same primordial, abiotic, non-atmospheric CO2.

July 4, 2025 6:40 am

Interesting read, thanks for putting all that together.
 
Here in Milwaukee it looks like it’s going to rain on our parade for the 4th until later in the day.
 
Pray for New York City, the direction that their mayoral election is going doesn’t look good.

Scissor
Reply to  Steve Case
July 4, 2025 6:46 am

Sometimes it takes a good shove to awaken people.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Steve Case
July 4, 2025 4:42 pm

I say they should get what they vote for, good and hard.

IAMPCBOB
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
July 5, 2025 1:05 pm

Oh, they will, they WILL! It may not be what they were expecting, though.

strativarius
July 4, 2025 6:46 am

In the UK the transition from x to y is well under way.

Reply to  strativarius
July 4, 2025 7:00 am

X being a once great Western nation and Y being third-world authoritarian shitehole.

Reply to  More Soylent Green!
July 4, 2025 10:34 am

well, if nothing else, it’s America’s unsinkable aircraft carrier in Europe- er, uh, near Europe

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
July 4, 2025 4:43 pm

It could capsize, if everyone moved to Northern Scotland.

Scarecrow Repair
July 4, 2025 7:00 am

British thermal units? On today of all days?

Reply to  Scarecrow Repair
July 4, 2025 7:32 am

The BTU’s are coming! The BTU’s are coming!

Reply to  Scarecrow Repair
July 4, 2025 9:06 am

I haven’t seen reference to BTU for decades, and that was possibly in an old text book. Apparently, according to Wikipedia at least, it’s used in the U.K. for measuring air conditioning (https://becoolrefrigeration.co.uk/ac-brand/) and radiator output (https://heatadviser.co.uk/british-thermal-units-explained/). However, I suspect when they say BTU they mean BTU/hr.

Reply to  JohnC
July 4, 2025 11:28 am

Look on the current US consumer “energy” labels for gas-fed water heaters, space heaters and air conditioners/heat pumps, also those on gas-fed stove-tops, ovens and ranges.

For example, in advertising:
https://www.google.com/search?q=amazon+buy+gas+water+heater

Reply to  Scarecrow Repair
July 4, 2025 11:08 am

Also, “joule” as derived from French and “watt” named after a Scot.

High time for new units of Ameri-energy and of Ameri-power to go along with the US recently fronting Ameri-temp.

Any suggestions?

/sarc

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  David Middleton
July 4, 2025 4:45 pm

I consider the Metric System as Measurement for Dummies.

John Hultquist
July 4, 2025 8:09 am

Thanks David.
Question I never asked my parents: Did the house have a wood or coal kitchen cook stove prior to the gas one I remember? They switched from coal to gas room heat about the time my memories kick in.
I do remember large piles of wood waste and sawdust that went unused until companies realized all the uses, including fuel, for it.
Also:
(from Duck Assist): “The Big Cut” refers to a significant period in Pennsylvania’s history during the late 19th and early 20th centuries when extensive logging operations led to the rapid depletion of forests.
From western PA and NY, logs were rafted to Pittsburgh and milled to make river boats for the westward migration, then the wood became prairie schooners. The web has many images of the boats and the schooners. For images of the boats, search with “flat bottom boats of westward migrations on Ohio river”
Another little mentioned forest product was “oak tree bark” used in tanning hides. 

AWG
Reply to  John Hultquist
July 4, 2025 8:26 am

Don’t forget railroad ties and bridges.

Scarecrow Repair
Reply to  John Hultquist
July 4, 2025 8:53 am

Odd little family history that is completely off topic:

An ancestor on my mother’s mother’s side decided to move west to all that new land out Missouri way. Sold the farm in Virginia, built a raft, and the family traveled down the Ohio River by day, tying up on the shore at night. One night the father died in his sleep. So they decamped there, and settled in Indiana.

Thus history twists and turns beyond human control.

Reply to  John Hultquist
July 4, 2025 10:36 am

Of course all those depleted forests grew back quickly.

Reply to  David Middleton
July 4, 2025 2:15 pm

When I lived on the farm my grandparents used a coal furnace. Granddad had to stoke the furnace before bed then get up early to get it fires burning again. Grandma cooked on a wood stove. She never ruined anything as I remember.

My other granddad had a pump with handle next to the kitchen sink. Fresh clean cold water. The closest phone was next door and was a wall mounted crank phone.

Bruce Cobb
July 4, 2025 8:59 am

“Nothing of importance happened today”.
Ba-hahahahahahahaha!

July 4, 2025 9:04 am

Be it resolved that we hold these truths to be self-evident:

That the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has outlived its charter and its usefulness:
— failing to make any significant change in mankind’s or nature’s emissions of greenhouse gases (such as water vapor, carbon dioxide and methane) since its formation in 1988,
— and furthermore failing to assemble a preponderance of science-based evidence that such greenhouse gases—including those released by humans—at their current levels are even harmful rather than beneficial, 
— and furthermore failing to establish computer “climate” models of any use in predicting even weather with any useful accuracy beyond about 5 years into the future when compared against measured data over such a time period, 
— and considering the above facts despite worldwide expenditures in excess of USD $1 TRILLION per year made since 2021 in vainly attempting to meet IPCC goals (see attachment),  
and thus that the IPCC should be defunded and eliminated.

That following the United Nations Conference of Parties number 30 (COP30) scheduled to be held in Brazil November 2025, said future conferences be defunded and eliminated because they have served no practical purpose in producing tangible results and, in fact, have hindered the advancement of mankind.

That the Paris Agreement, a document created at COP21, be recognized for its claimed falsehoods:
— that it is, in fact, not a “legally binding treaty” because it has no defined penalties or enforceable actions imposed on those signatories that fail to meet their arbitrary, self-defined, changeable GHG emission targets,
— that its “goal” of substantially reducing global GHG emissions so as to “hold global temperature increase to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursue efforts to limit it to 1.5°C above pre-industrial level” is not only unscientific but unachievable because (a) there is no scientific preponderance of evidence that GHG concentrations in the atmosphere are the major cause of global warming over the last 250 years, and (b) paleoclimateology science has shown that in Earth’s history—before humans ever walked on Earth—global temperatures were as high as 10°C above pre-industrial levels and global atmospheric CO2 levels ranged from a low of about 180 ppm to a high in excess of 2000 ppm (about five times current level) without these conditions posing an existential threat to life on Earth, and (c) that global warming is the natural result of exiting a glacial period, which happened on Earth only some 12,000 years or so ago, as is evidenced by the last ten or so glacial-intergalcial cycles that have occurred over the last one million years of Earth’s history, none of which were influenced by human activities,
— that its “goal” to “provide financing to developing countries to mitigate climate change, strengthen resilience and enhance abilities to adapt to climate impacts” is in reality a nicely-worded-but-thinly-disguised attempt to implement Robin Hood-style wealth redistribution among the world’s nations,
and thus that the Paris Agreement should be advertised as a shining example of the combined hubris and stupidity of bureaucrats.

IPCC_Goals_Costs
July 4, 2025 9:49 am

FYI — In the USA, our rights aren’t granted by government. We have natural rights as human beings.

The American Declaration of Independence is perhaps the most well-known document espousing natural rights.

Reply to  More Soylent Green!
July 4, 2025 10:02 am

Governments are instituted among men – they derive their just powers from the governed.

Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
July 4, 2025 10:55 am

Ahhh . . . GOOD governments are sometimes instituted among men – they derive their just powers from the governed.

Bad governments, such as dictatorial, socialist, communist, and facist ones — not so much.

Reply to  ToldYouSo
July 4, 2025 11:52 am

There are no good governments, just tolerable ones. Those would be as small and as near as possible, and always watched.
“Government is not reason, it is not eloquence –it is force! Like fire it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master; never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action.” -GEORGE WASHINGTON -JANUARY 7, 1790

Reply to  Mark Whitney
July 4, 2025 2:54 pm

“There are no good governments . . . “

I daresay that civilization, as we know it, could not possibly exist without some form of government . . . like it or not.

Beyond that observation, there is this:
No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time . . .”
— Winston Churchill, 11 November 1947

Reply to  ToldYouSo
July 4, 2025 3:16 pm

Larken Rose calls that “The Most Dangerous Superstition”. Though I tend to agree with you, that does not make it good, just necessary. I daresay nothing else is more corruptible, or attracts the corrupt more. For that reason government may be considered bad based on its size and scope alone, the type of government being secondary to that condition.
As C.S. Lewis opined:
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

Reply to  ToldYouSo
July 4, 2025 11:52 am

It was a quote. Didn’t think I needed quotation marks.

Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
July 4, 2025 3:01 pm

Even giving due respect to Thomas Jefferson’s eloquent words as he penned them in the US Declaration of Independence, I think my clarification is justified. Especially today.

Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
July 4, 2025 11:29 am

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,…”

The rights we were endowed with.

Reply to  More Soylent Green!
July 4, 2025 11:27 am

Natural rights come from nature’s God. And we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights.

You are correct MSG but let us not forget where the rights originate.

July 4, 2025 1:49 pm

Not quite true, David,

In the USA there has been an energy transition from Coal to Gas.

Reply to  David Middleton
July 4, 2025 4:21 pm

You “have” to transition if you want to buy Bud Lite, don’t you ?? 🙂

Reply to  bnice2000
July 5, 2025 9:02 am

I “transitioned” to Yuengling Flight.
(Though Yuengling Light is also good and both taste better than Bud Light.)