The Numbing Election

by Dan Lieberman / November 4th, 2024

Before radio waves vibrated in Calvin Coolidge’s 1924 campaign, voters had scarce knowledge of candidates in presidential elections. Despite the limited communications, only a few presidents of the United States (POTUS) were disasters and most were more acceptable. The rapid growth of communications brought the faces and words of candidates into everyone’s living rooms; it did not improve the selection of chief executives who moved into the White House living room. The assortment remained the same — a few great, most acceptable, and some sub-standard presidents.

Donald trump is the only elected president who never held public office or any office, including a military post, that served the American public. The only offices where Trump sat comfortably were in offices that served Donald Trump. Usually, if someone seeks guidance and authority, whether it is for medical, legal, educational, or money matters, the sought authority has experience, expertise, education, and works in the particular field. Because POTUS handles almost all our problems, it seems logical for the public to demand he/she has the background to guide us. Choosing someone with nil qualifications is dangerous, but not unique. Many people believe going to a doctor makes them sicker and putting life in the hands of a lawyer increases emptying the wallet and complicating legal problems. Evidently, a great portion of the American public neither trusts the education system that prepares graduates for government service nor the institutions in which they operate.

Trump’s lack of government service before seeking the highest position is an incomplete story. In fairness to Donald Trump, he has engaged in politics for decades, several times making official runs for the presidency, and has knowledge and opinions on domestic and foreign issues and policies. He has extensive experience and accomplishments in business, finance, legal issues, and entertainment; knows how to “wheel and deal,” how to “lead and bleed,” how to “hire and fire,” how to “lie and mystify,“ and how to “hustle and muscle,” all characteristics of a smooth politician. Trump is not smooth, his politics are described by one adjective, an overused word that has made headlines and may decide the election ─ garbage ─ Trump is a master of “garbage politics.”

It is a mystery how an inexperienced political person of Trump’s indecent, lying, demagogic, and contemptuous character could obtain the nomination over a host of dedicated, recognized and well-established Republicans. Could it be that Trump arrived upon the scene at an opportune moment? After the dismal performance and multitude of failures of the George W. Bush administration and the inability of conventional Republicans, John McCain and Mitt Romney, to regain the presidency, the Party faithful recognized that the Party that began with Abraham Lincoln, had faded with George W. Bush, and saw its last gasp with Mitt Romney. In 2016, their Republican Party could no longer win elections. Those who disdained the neoliberalism of the Democratic Party, those who saw godliness in the Democratic Party, those who felt the Democratic Party had pandered to non-white minorities and marginalized white majorities, and Republican leaders who believed, “winning was not everything, it was the only thing,” sought elsewhere. They scorned the leadership. Trump’s degradations, insults, and rants pleased them ─ the previous leaders had it coming.

Maybe winning the Republican nomination over disciplined, dedicated, accepted, and performing Republicans, who had recognition, such as John Kasich, Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, George Pataki, Mike Huckabee, and Bobby Jindall is explained by, “Failure has no redemption.” How did Trump then go on and win the election? He didn’t; Hillary Clinton ran an insulting and dismal campaign and lost an election most any recognized Democrat would have won.

By normal political measures, a healthy President Joe Biden could have easily defeated former President Donald Trump in the coming election. A healthy Biden already beat Trump in the previous election and had an administration featuring low unemployment, a decent economy, no catastrophes, and foreign policy initiatives, which may have disturbed a portion of the electorate but were acceptable to the masses. The inflation was a hand-me-down from the excessive spending and Federal Reserve easy money policies during Trump’s administration. Besides, the president has little control of inflation and reality is that it has subsided. Many positives and few negatives for a previously chosen Biden.

By normal political measures, Trump would have lost heavily to a healthy Biden. He had already lost once, had nothing new to show that improved his image, and had January 6, 2021 and a number of legal cases to dampen enthusiasm for him. His rhetoric has become more vile, more disturbing, and more mendacious. Continuous references to the “stolen election,” are effectively challenged, so why does Trump continue with the blasphemy? This author has previously shown that it is impossible to manipulate many votes in a national election. Can’t understand why the articulation of electoral security has never been used to stop Trump’s implausible claim of having won the election? Many negatives and no positives for a previously rejected Trump.

Historians have added an exclamation to a healthy Biden’s superiority to a disturbing Trump. In a survey of 154 members of the American Political Science Association, in which respondents graded U.S. presidents on 10 characteristics — administrative skills, moral authority, economic management, and others — President Joe Biden was ranked a high 14th, and former President Donald Trump was ranked 45th, placing him as the worst president in U.S. history. What more is needed to steer voters away from Trump? Aren’t historian opinions worth something in shaping minds and decisions?

Despite the large discrepancy between a successful Joe Biden and a failed Donald Trump, the ex-president managed to remain in contention, even when Biden still had his faculties. After Biden retired, Trump suffered a temporary setback to Kamala Harris, the new face on the block. A few days before election, “Harris and Trump are tied at 48% in the latest nationwide TIPP Tracking Poll.” How can this be? Kamala Harris may not be all the voters want as president, but she is heir to a successful presidency and has not exhibited any deep negatives. Two suggested reasons for this anomaly.

Harris has a nervous laugh and lacks charisma. Trump, with all his bloating and gloating, has charisma; the charisma of a demagogue. Americans are attracted to the sensational, to the charismatic, no matter the types of sensation and charisma. All publicity, good or bad, leads to product identification, and is helpful. Product Trump knows how to make the front page and generate publicity.

Elon Musk has been a crucial factor in reenergizing the Trump campaign. Musk has huge success, not only as a successful entrepreneur, but as a man of vision. He is admired by the American public. If he sees Trump as a viable candidate to whom he is willing to give his attachment, then Trump must have more to his persona than is apparent. If Elon Musk is going to be a part of a Trump administration, which does not seem possible when considering the magnitude of the efforts he must give to his precarious commercial endeavors, Trump deserves a vote.

As we enter the final days of a close presidential campaign, it is foolish to predict the outcome. Polls, pundits, and momentums indicate it will be tough sledding for Kamala Harris.

Dan Lieberman publishes commentaries on foreign policy, economics, and politics at substack.com.  He is author of the non-fiction books A Third Party Can Succeed in America, Not until They Were Gone, Think Tanks of DC, The Artistry of a Dog, and a novel: The Victory (under a pen name, David L. McWellan). Read other articles by Dan.

Kamala is the In-Girl

Everyone loves her

by B.R. Gowani / November 4th, 2024

IMAGE/Monthly Review

The criteria for winning a presidential debate is very simple: the candidate who fumbles less, makes less mistakes, avoids too many verbal gaffes, etc., who is able to present a rosy picture for the future, and, who believes in people’s “ambition, the aspirations, [and] the dreams,” is the winner — provided all bullshitting is done with a serious face.

However, it’s entirely a different matter whether that person has any genuine solutions to the problems majority of the people face.

Exactly eight years ago, first time in US history of 240 years, a woman had a chance to reach the highest office — Hillary Clinton won popular votes by almost 3 million votes, but that rare opportunity was snatched away by the Electoral College. The victory went to Donald Trump, a slowly evolving fascist. It is to be remembered that Clinton was not that woman progressives have been waiting for.

This time, another woman, Kamala Harris, is in the race for presidency. Her opponent is none other than Trump. Harris was not in the competition but got her opportunity when the Democratic establishment realized, after the Biden/Trump debate, that the horse they have been trying to steady for three and a half years cannot any more stand on its own, and could give up any moment.

Thus, Joe Biden was pushed aside with a tribute that he left the race for a second term out of patriotic duty. Everyone knows that almost no one gives up power, whether s/he is an authoritarian or a “democrat,” without a rough push.

Kamala is the in-girl

Kamala is the in-girl — so many love and support her, not only most of the Democrats but also some prominent Republicans! Within 36 hours of Biden’s decision not to run, and his nominating of Harris as his successor, Harris campaign raised $100 million that jumped to $310 in less than two weeks, with new donors contributing two-thirds of the amount. By September 6, the number had nearly doubled to $615 million. Andrew Byrnes, a tech policy strategist and Harris fundraiser, said the amount he raised for Kamala in one week was double the amount he raised for Biden in a whole year.

In two months, the amount rose to $1 billion. No other presidential candidate has accumulated such a huge amount in such a short period!

Trump is no match for Harris in fundraising despite the fact that his campaign received $100 million from Miriam Adelson who likes Trump so much that she said “Book of Trump”¹ should be added to the Bible, i.e. the Old Testament. Trump allied PAC also got $150 million from Timothy Mellon. Trump’s equally nasty buddy Elon Musk has contributed $76 million.

Trump is the best thing that has happened to the Democratic Party. Most Democrats never tire of ridiculing him. This enables them and the Democrat-leaning news media to keep their supporters busy in Trump’s antics and eccentricities and thus saves the party from answering hard questions.

MSNBC is also known as MSDNC or Democratic National Committee mouthpiece. MSNBC is a cheerleader for the Democrats. Biden and Harris regularly watch MSNBC’s Morning Joe with Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski. “A Jacobin analysis of six months of its Gaza coverage reveals an unflagging role cheering on Israel’s genocide.”

Reid Hoffman, LinkedIn co-founder and billionaire, is backing Kamala because he wants to get rid of Lina Khan, chair of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Billionaire Mark Cuban endorsed Harris too for the same reason: dump Khan.

Sheryl Sandberg is “thrilled to support” Kamala,² because

She is an accomplished leader, a fierce advocate of abortion rights, and the strongest candidate to lead our country forward.

Ron Conway, a billionaire, has asked tech community to join hands to salvage “our democracy” by getting behind Kamala, whom he has known “for decades” to prevent Trump’s reentry into White House. Conway says she is an “advocate for the tech ecosystem since the day we met.”

Melinda French Gates ($13 million), Reed Hastings (Netflix), George Soros and Alex Soros, Vinod Khosla, Jeffrey Katzenberg (former president of Walt Disney Studios), Bill Gates ($50 million), and other billionaires numbering 81 (or more) have joined the Kamala bandwagon, whereas, Trump has 52 billionaires with him.

Billionaires’ bribes count. Harris, who was with Biden’s plan of raising capital gains tax from 23.8% to 44.6%, opted for 33%, instead.

More than 90 business leaders, including over a dozen billionaires, wrote and signed an endorsement letter to Harris.

“Her election is the best way to support the continued strength, security, and reliability of our democracy and economy. … [She] ensure[s] American businesses can compete and win in the global market. … she will strive to give every American the opportunity to pursue the American dream.”

These billionaire and multimillionaire business people have nothing to do with democracy. The main thrust of the letter is US “businesses can compete and win in the global market,” under Harris, that is, the US government either diplomatically or through military force opens up foreign markets for them like US Commodore Matthew Perry forced Japan to open up for business in 1853. The other fallacy is that Kamala will try to provide people with “the opportunity to pursue the American dream.”

A few corporations are controlling most businesses in US. People are free to dream but whose dreams get realized is decided by the people in power.

Many US presidents, have warned about the increasing corporate power and its harmful effect on country. Thomas Jefferson had hoped in 1816 to “crush” the corporate power which was challenging government and defying laws. Instead the corporations crushed the government power and as journalist and novelist Theodore Dreiser puts it, “the corporations are the government.” (China is a capitalist country but the government controls the capitalists; this is anathema to the US; it wants China to go the US way.)

Women are elated with Harris entering the race for two main reasons: one is that someone from their gender has a chance to win and the other is Harris’ support for abortion. Sadly, most of these women have no Palestinian and Lebanese women and children on their mind.

Porn actors, some of them, are spending over $100,000 in seven swing states in support of Harris because they fear Trump presidency and Project 2025 will ban the porn industry. Harris should thank them but should ask them to stop violence and degradation of women in many of their videos.

Jeff Bridges extended his support to Kamala who is “just so certainly our girl.” He proudly proclaimed: “I’m white, I’m a dude, and I’m for Harris.” Bridges was a part of White Dudes for Harris Zoom call; over 180,000 joined in and raised about $4 million for her campaign. The invitation to join in was based on: “Are you a white guy who believes in science, human rights, and democracy?”

There have been several similar events: such as Latinas for Harris; White Women: Answer the Call; the Black Women Zoom; Caribbean-Americans for Harris; South Asian Women for Harris; Disabled Voters for Harris; Black Men for Harris; Win With Black Women; and South Asian Men for Harris.

Salman Rushdie, an author, joined the South Asian Men for Harris virtual meet and declared he’s in for Harris “1,000 per cent.”³ One could understand Rushdie’s worry as a writer because if Trump wins and turns dictator, of which there are great chances, then he and his ministers, like Elon Musk, won’t tolerate any kind of criticism. The Kamala government would let them write in small publications and press which have limited reach and do not disturb or threaten the ruling class and the system.

Singer-songwriter Taylor Swift is for Kamala too because “She is a steady-handed, gifted leader and I believe we can accomplish so much more in this country if we are led by calm and not chaos.”

Billionaire Swift resides in her own bubble and is unaware that, until now the US has been led by calm leaders, but most people have achieved nothing but decline.

In 1982, when the Forbes 400 list was initiated, one could join the list with $100 million ($300 million in today’s money). There were only 13 billionaires then. Today, you need eleven times that amount or $3.3 billion to be one of 400 wealthy in US. So, 400 billionaires made it to the list but 415 individuals couldn’t make it, including Oprah Winfrey who has $3 billion, less than the required $3.3 billion.

What about the rest of the people? A whopping 37% of people in US have less than $400 in savings!

Singer-songwriter Beyonce joined Kamala at a rally in Houston to extend her support. Many celebrities including Leonardo DiCaprio, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Eminem, Bruce Springsteen, Patti LaBelle, Jennifer Lopez, Jamie Lee Curtis, George Clooney,⁴ and Sarah Jessica Parker (who is voting for Kamala for 31 things, including “For our military, past and currently serving” but not for peace or ceasefire in Gaza).

Dick Cheney, the Vice President in George W. Bush regime and one of the major architects of the Iraq War, a Republican, has also announced that he’ll vote for Kamala Harris.

“[There had] never been an individual who is a greater threat to our republic than Donald Trump”

“He [Trump] tried to steal the last election using lies and violence to keep himself in power after the voters had rejected him.” “He can never be trusted with power again.”

“As citizens, we each have a duty to put country above partisanship to defend our constitution.” “That is why I will be casting my vote for Vice-President Kamala Harris.”

Liz Cheney, a Republican and Dick Cheney’s daughter, supports Harris too, and joined her campaign events thrice in early October. Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , the progressive supporters and Democrats like Harris, are campaigning for her but have not been invited to appear with Harris, as yet.

Liz Cheney criticized Trump: “He is petty, he is vindictive, and he is cruel.” If she had not mentioned Trump’s name, one would have assumed she was talking about her dad Dick Cheney who is not any better, in any respect, but is worst than Trump –until now. Liz Cheney also added: “Violence does not and must never determine who rules us. Voters do.”

Trump called Dick Cheney (whose approval rating, when he left office, was mere 13%) a “King of Endless, Nonsensical Wars,” and blasted both father- daughter duo on his TruthSocial account.

“… Her father, Dick, was a leader of our ridiculous journey into the Middle East, where Trillions of Dollars were spent, millions of people were killed – and for what? NOTHING! Well, today, these two fools, because the Republican Party no longer wants them, endorsed the most Liberal Senator in U.S. Senate, further Left than even Pocahontas or Crazy Bernie Sanders – Lyin’ Kamala Harris. What a pathetic couple that is, both suffering gravely from Trump Derangement Syndrome. Good Luck to them both!!!”

Trump is correct about Dick Cheney. He was George H.W. Bush’s Defense Secretary when US went to war against Iraq and destroyed that country. Dick Cheney was Vice President of Bush Jr., when US devastated Afghanistan in 2001, and again went to war against Iraq, in 2003.

Trump lies a great deal but then every now and then he also shows a mirror of the US empire, and its imperialist crimes. Trump once told Bill O’Reilly, “We’ve got a lot of killers. What do you think — our country’s so innocent?” Or just recently he said: Trillions of Dollars were spent, millions of people were killed. Now this kind of talk can’t be conducive to people running the empire because they suffer from spectrophobia.

238 staffers from four previous Republican governments and many more, including John Negroponte, one of the criminal minds of US imperialism, endorsed Kamala. Barbara Pierce Bush (daughter of former Republican president George W. Bush) is supporting Kamala with the hope the US moves “forward and protect women’s rights.”

Why so many wealthy and powerful people have gotten behind Kamala? The reasons, as we have seen vary, but the most important one is that Kamala will maintain the statue quo. She’s not going to make any drastic changes, but just the cosmetic type.

On the other hand, many rich, and not very rich, in the ruling class are scared of Trump’s unpredictable nature. The wealthy class may benefit much more under Trump than under Harris. In 2017, Trump lowered the corporate tax rate from (Obama government’s) 35% to 21% and corporations benefited a lot. (Biden raised it to 28% and not the 35% it used to be during his vice presidency.)

Trump may concentrate on domestic issues rather than waging foreign wars; but, then if something triggers him, or he is incited by his aides, or perceives a threat from foreign leader(s), then he may go unhinged.

Biden praised Liz Cheney’s “courage” to appear with Harris. “I admire her. Her dad and I worked together a long, long time.” Biden, like Cheneys, loves violence and war. Republicans and Democrats working together can screw the people within and without the US. It becomes so much easier to wage a war against “foreign enemy” when both parties are working together.

Trump will probably do within the US, what the US has been doing to the world for several decades. He will unleash the army on his opponents and critics. Here is Trump:

“The threat from outside forces is far less sinister, dangerous, and grave, than the threat from within, Despite the hatred and anger of the Radical Left Lunatics who want to destroy our Country, we will MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”⁵

Irony

In 2021, Trump’s vice presidential candidate, J.D. Vance had portrayed Vice President Kamala Harris and other women Democrats as, “a bunch of childless cat ladies miserable at their own lives.”

During the presidential debate in September 2024, Trump falsely charged Haitians residing in Springfield, Ohio, of “eating the dogs … the cats … the pets of the people that live there.”

On October 31, Trump said “Well, I’m going to do it whether the women like it or not. I am going to protect them.”

On October 27, comedian Tony Hinchcliffe made racist fun of Latino people by saying “These Latinos, they love making babies,” he called Puerto Rico “a floating island of garbage,” and repeated the lie about Haitians eating pets.

Donald Trump and his team, it seems, is striving to lose the election. Despite that, the polls show a tight race between Trump and Harris.

On Harris’ side, she is careful but had to distance herself from Biden telling Latinos “The only garbage I see floating out there is his [Trump] supporters — his — his demonization of Latinos is unconscionable, and it’s un-American.” Harris has yet to comment on former president Bill Clinton‘s “racist Michigan speech” as Sanjana Karanth puts it. Bill Clinton said:

“I understand why young Palestinian and Arab Americans in Michigan think too many people have died — I get that, but…” “Hamas makes sure that they’re shielded by civilians, they’ll force you to kill civilians, if you want to defend yourself.”

Harris is very popular, was able to amass great amount of money, got lot of support but somehow the polls — which may be wrong , as often happens — are not favoring her. Who knows, as investigative reporter Dave Lindorff points out, Harris could win if she gets “secret women’s vote” in rural Pennsylvania similar to what happened in Kansas in 2022 regarding the banning of abortion referendum. Julia Roberts encouraged women to exercise their right to choose, within the privacy of the election booth:

This is an election where voters will decide between possible drastic changes that result in fascism, versus, maintaining the unjust pro-war inegalitarian status quo.

However, those who are fed up with the two main lesser and greater evils, there are two other candidates to choose from who are anti-war and pro-common people: Jill Stein of Green Party and Claudia De la Cruz of Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL).⁶

ENDNOTES:

• 1
  Miriam Adelson wrote in her paper Israel Hayom: “Would it be too much to pray for a day when the Bible gets a ‘Book of Trump,’ much like it has a ‘Book of Esther’ celebrating the deliverance of the Jews from ancient Persia? “Until that is decided, let us, at least, sit back and marvel at this time of miracles for Israel, for the United States, and for the whole world.”
• 2
  In June 2024, Kamala Harris joined by Sandberg screened Sandberg’s documentary Screams Before Silence at the White House. The film was about alleged rapes by Hamas members — a long debunked theory. See Briahna Joy Gray’s detailed expose about the entire issue.
• 3
  Once accepted by US mainstream, which Rushdie has been, he toned down or ignored the crimes of the US, and its ally, Israel. There was a time when Rushdie was for the Palestinian cause; he interviewed Professor Edward Said, the most prominent Palestinian in the Western world then. Last year, Rushdie repeated the Western line of argument labeling Hamas “as a “terrorist organization.” One should have asked Rushdie as to how the occupied people should fight their occupiers.
• 4
  In March 2012, George Clooney was arrested in Washington DC while protesting in front of Sudan’s embassy for violence in South Sudan. He then boasted: “We are the antigenocide paparazzi.” But nowadays Clooney is careful what he says: “I’m very careful not to use words like genocide, occupation, colonialism, open-air prisons — despite believing they do accurately describe what’s happening in Gaza. Those put a target on your back. I also don’t use the word unprovoked. A lot of people say October 7 was “unprovoked.” Well, it’s a massive chicken-and-egg situation, this back-and-forth. Also, I didn’t know the word cease-fire would be such a problem! I would hope we don’t want wars!”
• 5
  See “Making America Great, Again? Racism, Poverty, Violence…“
• 6
  See also “A Moral Imperative for the 2024 US Elections.”FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

B.R. Gowani can be reached at brgowani@hotmail.com. Read other articles by B.R.

Late Arriving Containership Delays Reach Highest Levels Since Pandemic

Containership delays continue to grow in 2024 as vessels were forced to reroute and experienced port congestion (file phot)

Published Nov 4, 2024 7:29 PM by The Maritime Executive

 

The average delay for containerships behind schedule has continued to increase in 2024 rising to the highest levels except during the peak of the pandemic and surge in container volumes. Sea-Intelligence is out with its monthly look at the average performance of the container shipping carriers across 34 different trade lanes highlighting the industry remains broadly impacted by the disruptions of 2024.

“While schedule reliability in 2024 has stabilized within the 50 to 55 percent range, it’s been on a slight downward trend since the May peak,” commented Alan Murphy, CEO of Sea-Intelligence. He however notes that “The low levels of volatility in schedule reliability in 2024 do give shippers a relatively good idea of what to expect month over month.”

Overall, the industry’s schedule reliability slipped a further 1.2 percentage points in September to 51.4 percent. It is the bottom of the range for 2024 and the lowest level the industry has seen in 24 months. From a dismal level of just one in three ships on schedule in 2021, the industry surpassed the 50 percent mark in October 2022 and was able to get as high as 64 percent in mid-2023. The declines resumed in December 2023 as the Houthis began to interrupt containership schedules through the Red Sea.

The current performance compares with 2019 when before the pandemic, the surge in volumes, and now the Red Sea diversions, containerships were reaching 80 percent schedule reliability. Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd have set an ambitious target of reaching 90 percent schedule reliability on key routes once they launch the Gemini Cooperation in 2025. 

Maersk remains at the top of the industry with the best schedule reliability in September 2024 and one of only four carriers among the top 13 that were able to improve performance between August and September. However, Maersk is at just 55.5 percent down from 70 percent a year ago. Zim, PIL, and Wan Hai were the other carriers that were able to improve performance month over month.

All the top carriers are showing a significant decline year over year. From an average of 60 percent in September 2023, the largest carriers are down 13 percentage points to an average of 47 percent in September 2024. Three carriers (MSC, PIL, and Wan Hai) are each down over 20 percentage points year-over-year calculates Sea-Intelligence. The average decline year-over-year is 13 percentage points with a 2.5 percent point average decline in September 2024 versus the prior month.

While schedule reliability has been in a narrow range for 2024, Sea-Intelligence highlights that the September 2024 average delay is “the third-highest figure for the month, only surpassed by pandemic highs of 2021-2022.”

The average delay in September was up a further 0.21 days reports Sea-Intelligence. They calculate that the average delay for late vessel arrivals is now 5.67 days. The average for 2024 is up half a day from the 2023 average. Before the rerouting began, vessels had clawed the delay back to below five days for late arrivals. 

The most consistent level of port congestion remains in Asia reports Linerlytica. In addition to the Chinese ports, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Korea, Linerlytica however shows increased levels at Savannah and in Northern Europe’s large container ports on its October 31 snapshot.

With the diversions around Africa and winter weather challenges off the South Africa, ports and carriers highlighted problems with vessel bunching at ports. This was creating the congestion spikes at individual ports which further added to the delays.

Maersk warned the industry last week that it expects the disruptions coming from the Red Sea rerouting to continue well in 2025. The Houthis over the weekend vowed to continue their attacks while the leader of the group reported they have targeted over 200 vessels in the past year.

 

Engineering contract for Bulgarian units signed with Hyundai E&C and Westinghouse

Monday, 4 November 2024

 World Nuclear News

Hyundai Engineering & Construction, Westinghouse and Kozloduy NPP - New Builds have signed an engineering contract for new capacity at Bulgaria's Kozloduy nuclear power plant.

(Image: Bulgaria's Council of Ministers)

Bulgaria's Prime Minister, Dimitar Glavchev, speaking at the signing ceremony, said: "Bulgaria has 50 years of experience in the safe and secure operation of nuclear facilities. Today, we are building on this experience. Our work with the undisputed leaders Westinghouse and Hyundai on this project is a serious step towards the implementation of one of the government's main priorities related to the development of nuclear energy."

Energy Minister Vladimir Malinov said: "The development of nuclear energy in strict compliance with international standards for safety and environmental protection is one of the main priorities of the government. Our consistent efforts and active work together with our partners at Westinghouse and Hyundai in fulfilling this priority have led to today's result - the signing of an engineering contract for the new facilities. This is a key stage that makes the process irreversible."

He added that signing the contract meant that schedule and finance details would be firmed up within 12 months for the new capacity.

Kozloduy units 1-4 were VVER-440 models which the European Commission classified as non-upgradeable and Bulgaria agreed to close them during negotiations to join the European Union in 2007. Units 5 and 6 feature VVER-1000 reactors that were connected to the grid in 1987 and 1991, respectively. Both units have been through refurbishment and life-extension programmes to enable extension of operation from 30 to 60 years. The country's two operable reactors generate about one-third of its electricity.

The aim is for the first new Westinghouse AP1000 unit - unit 7 at Kozloduy - to be operational in 2035 and the second one - unit 8 - to be operational in 2037. The 2300 MWe capacity of the two new units would exceed the 1760 MWe capacity of the closed first four units. The Bulgarian government has also said that further units will be needed to replace units 5 and 6 by 2050.

 

China's first CAP1400 begins supplying power

Monday, 4 November 2024

 World Nuclear News

The first of two demonstration Guohe One (CAP1400) reactors at Huaneng Group's Shidaowan site in China's Shandong province has been connected to the grid. The 1400 MWe pressurised water reactor design is intended to be deployed in large numbers across the country, as well as for export.

An illustration of the CAP1400 demonstration project (Image: CNEA)

The CAP1400 is an enlarged version of the CAP1000 PWR developed from the Westinghouse AP1000, with consulting input from the USA-based company. 

Research and development for Guohe One began in 2008. In December 2009, the State Nuclear Plant Demonstration Company – a 55-45% joint venture company by State Power Investment Corp (SPIC) and China Huaneng Group – was set up to build and operate two demonstration unit of the CAP1400 at Huaneng's Shidaowan site at Rongcheng. SPIC officially launched the CAP1400 reactor design in September 2020.

Construction of unit 1 started in June 2019 and unit 2 in April 2020. The reactor design is expected to take 56 months to build, with later units coming down to 50 months.

The National Nuclear Safety Administration issued an operating license for the first Guohe One demonstration reactor in late July this year.

Speaking at a press conference on 31 October, Dong Wancheng, deputy director of the Development Planning Department at the National Energy Administration (NEA), announced that the first CAP1400 unit at Shidaowan had been successfully connected to the grid.

The CAP1400 reactor design (Image: SPIC)

The reactor will now undergo gradual power ascension testing and trial operation verification before officially entering commercial operation.

"After it is put into operation, the annual power generation will be 11.4 billion kilowatt-hours, which can meet the electricity needs of more than 11 million residents and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by more than 9 million tonnes per year," NEA noted.

It added: "Since 2022, several CAP series third-generation nuclear power units under the State Power Investment Corporation have been approved to start construction, and this series of nuclear power models will usher in a peak period of construction in the next few years."

In May 2016, the CAP1400 design successfully passed the International Atomic Energy Agency's Generic Reactor Safety Review. This review is not a clearance process but a review of the quality of the safety documents identifying strengths, weaknesses and gaps. International use of the CAP1400 is still dependent on meeting country-specific standards and requirements, but passing the IAEA safety review will make this process easier.

 

Regulator rejects amended Susquehanna power agreement

Monday, 4 November 2024

 World Nuclear News

The US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has issued an order rejecting the amended Susquehanna Interconnection Service Agreement between PJM Interconnection, PPL Electric Utilities and Talen Energy Corporation proposing to increase the load capacity of Amazon's data centre at the Susquehanna nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania.

Susquehanna (Image: Talen Energy)

In March, Talen announced the sale of its 960 MW Cumulus data centre campus in northeast Pennsylvania to Amazon Web Services (AWS), with a long-term agreement to provide power from its Susquehanna plant. The Cumulus campus is directly connected to the two-unit nuclear power plant.

AWS plans to develop a 960 MW data centre at the site and has minimum contractual power commitments ramping up in 120 MW increments over several years, starting in 2025. Each step up in capacity commitment is at a fixed price for an initial 10 years, after which it will be based on a fixed margin above prevailing prices. AWS will have a one-time option to cap commitments at 480 MW and has two 10-year extension options, which are tied to the renewals of the two nuclear units' licences in 2042 and 2044.

PJM is the regional transmission organisation that coordinates the movement of wholesale electricity in all or parts of Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia and the District of Columbia. Its request to amend an existing Interconnection Service Agreement (ISA) to increase from 300 MW to 480 MW the amount of load it is allowed to transfer from Susquehanna as "co-located load" was filed with FERC on 3 June. (Co-located load refers to end-use customer load that is physically connected to the facilities of an existing or planned customer facility at the point of interconnection to the PJM transmission system).

The amendment states that 480 MW of load may be physically transferred to a co-located load's transmission facilities without a material impact on the transmission system, and also notes that Susquehanna has proposed modifications to allow it to physically transfer 960 MW of power.

Exelon Corporation and American Electric Power lodged a protest with FERC on 24 June, saying that the regulator must either hold a hearing, or, failing that, reject the Interconnection Service Agreement (ISA).

FERC commissioners have now voted 2-1 against the proposal, saying "PJM has not demonstrated that the proposed non-conforming provisions in the Amended ISA are necessary deviations from the pro forma ISA due to specific reliability concerns, novel legal issues, or other unique factors".

Talen said it believes FERC "erred" in its decision and the company is evaluating its options, "with a focus on commercial solutions". It added: "We believe this ISA amendment is just and reasonable and in the best interest of consumers. FERC's decision will have a chilling effect on economic development in states such as Pennsylvania, Ohio, and New Jersey.

"Importantly, the existing ISA allows for 300 megawatts of co-located load at Susquehanna, and development of the first phases of the Amazon Web Services data centre campus can proceed using those 300 megawatts while Talen continues to pursue approval of the amended ISA."

The Susquehanna plant, in Salem Township, comprises two boiling water reactors and is 90%-owned and operated by Talen subsidiary Susquehanna Nuclear, LLC. Allegheny Electric owns 10% of the 2475 MWe plant.

Nuclear power is increasingly being eyed by energy-intensive data centres as a means of meeting their energy demand while achieving zero-carbon objectives, whether through co-location of resources, or energy-matching deals.

U.S. Drilling Activity Going Nowhere Baker Hughes Data Shows

By Julianne Geiger - Nov 01, 2024




The total number of active drilling rigs for oil and gas in the United States saw no change this week, according to new data that Baker Hughes published on Friday, after holding steady in the week prior.

The total rig count stayed at 585, according to Baker Hughes, down more than 5% from this same time last year.

The number of oil rigs fell by 1 this week to 479—down by 17 compared to this time last year. The number of gas rigs rose by 1 this week to 102, a loss of 16 active gas rigs from this time last year. Miscellaneous rigs stayed the same at 4.

Meanwhile, U.S. crude oil production stayed at its highest level ever in the week ending October 25—for the third week in a row—according to weekly estimates published by the Energy Information Administration (EIA). Current weekly oil production in the United States, according to the EIA, continues to sit at 13.5 million bpd.

Primary Vision’s Frac Spread Count, an estimate of the number of crews completing wells that are unfinished, rose by one in the week ending October 25, from 238 to 239—nearly at the same level as the beginning of the year.

Drilling activity in the Permian slipped by 1 this week to 303—a figure that is 7 fewer than this same time last year. The count in the Eagle Ford also fell by 1, to 48. Rigs in the Eagle Ford are now just 3 below where they were this time last year.

Oil prices were trading up on Friday. At 12:23 p.m. ET, the WTI benchmark was trading up $0.79 (+1.14%) on the day at $70.05, down roughly $1.30 per barrel from this time last week. The Brent benchmark was trading up $0.79 (+1.09%) on the day at $73.60—more than $2 per barrel down from last Friday’s price.

By Julianne Geiger for Oilprice.com

Billions Pouring into UK Renewables

By Felicity Bradstock - Nov 02, 2024

The UK's new Labour government is aggressively pursuing a green energy agenda, with significant investments in renewable projects and supportive policies.

Innovative initiatives like Octopus Energy's wind-powered bill discounts and community-owned solar projects are gaining traction.

The UK aims to become a global leader in floating offshore wind and other clean technologies, attracting billions in private investment.


The U.S. has become recognised for rolling out the most far-reaching climate policy of any major world power to date. The Biden administration’s 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) introduced a wide range of financial incentives to support a green transition, which has helped attract billions in private investment in renewable energy and clean technologies. The EU and the U.K., which were expected to lead the green transition, have lagged behind the U.S. on climate policy over the last two years. However, the U.K.’s new Labour government is rapidly developing its green transition strategy, supported by strong climate policies, innovative energy initiatives, and financial incentives that could soon rival U.S. efforts.

The U.K.’s largest electricity supplier, Octopus Energy, has launched a new initiative to offer consumers a discount on their energy bills during times of favourable conditions for renewable energy production. So, when the wind is blowing more, the company offers consumers reduced-price electricity from its wind turbines. The company hopes this will encourage consumers to support wind turbine projects, as well as use energy in a more considered way. This is just one of the schemes being run by utilities and the government to demonstrate that a shift away from fossil fuels to renewable alternatives could help slash energy bills and have a better impact on the environment.

One London-based start-up, Ripple Energy, is now inviting people to purchase a piece of a wind turbine in exchange for a discount on their electricity bills. Meanwhile, in Grimsby in the north of England, a local cooperative is investing in small-scale solar projects to help cut energy costs for charities in the area.

The U.K. has set ambitious climate targets but has been greatly criticised for not doing enough to meet these goals. The previous Conservative government pledged that all of the U.K.’s electricity would come from low carbon sources by 2035, as well as announced plans to increase offshore wind capacity five-fold by 2030, increase solar power capacity five-fold by 2035, and expand nuclear power. Yet, in February, U.K. ministers found themselves in court for a second time for failing to align the climate action plan with the government’s climate pledges, as well as filling the plan with ambiguities and loopholes.

However, since the Labour Party was voted into government in July, we have seen a significant shift in the country’s energy sector. In just over three months, Labour has launched a multibillion-dollar effort to reposition the U.K. as a global pacesetter for clean energy. In July, the government established a new publicly owned, clean-energy company –Great British Energy, which will own, manage, and operate clean power projects. In September, the U.K. government agreed to buy the electricity system operator from National Grid for around $816.8 million, further enhancing its role in the energy industry.

In August, the government announced a record-breaking investment of over $1.9 billion in domestic renewable energy projects. Some of the renewable energy and clean tech projects now underway include a new investment support scheme for long-duration electricity storage (LDES) projects, plans for the U.K.’s first large-scale carbon capture and storage sites in Teesside and Merseyside, and the publication of a report from a government-industry taskforce that highlights the U.K.’s potential to become a global leader in floating offshore wind energy. The government has also launched the website Innovating the Energy Transition, which outlines investment opportunities and provides a tailored step-by-step guide to help companies set up their business in the U.K.

The government’s ambitious new energy initiatives are already helping to attract higher levels of funding from the private sector in renewable energy and clean tech. In September, Octopus Energy Generation announced plans to invest almost $2.6 billion in clean energy projects by 2030.

Zoisa North-Bond, the CEO of Octopus Energy, stated, “The U.K. is on the verge of a green energy revolution.” North-Bond added, “This £2 billion investment in homegrown renewables will help boost our energy security and pave the way for a more affordable energy future… Solar and onshore wind are among the cheapest energy sources available. By building closer to demand, we can maximise green electricity when it’s abundant and lower bills for customers nationwide.”

In October, the government announced it had raised nearly $31.1 billion in private investment for pioneering energy projects. This came ahead of the International Investment Summit, which helped garner greater attention for sectoral growth in line with new government energy policies and climate pledges.

Following years of stagnation under the Conservative government, there have been significant strides in energy policy and clean energy incentives in recent months under the new Labour government. This is expected to attract high levels of private investment in the coming years and diversify clean energy investment beyond the U.S. market.


By Felicity Bradstock for Oilprice.com