Monday, September 11, 2023

Africa's wave of coups stokes fears among autocrats

Martina Schwikowski
DW
September 7, 2023

The recent coups in Gabon and Niger have raised concerns among other African presidents who fear a threat to their power and have appointed new generals.



Many Gabonese hope for a better government than the one led by President Ali Bongo 


The military takeover in Niger at the end of July showed that democratic-turned-autocratic leaders of other nations may face a similar fate if the latest wave of coups in Africa continues.

Just over a month after the military takeover in which Niger's democratically elected president, Mohamad Bazoum, was overthrown, a coup in the central African nation of Gabon has increased a ripple of unrest across the region.
Like father, like son

Four days after presidential elections in Gabon, soldiers deposed President Ali Bongo Ondimba after 14 years in office. He had succeeded his father Omar Bongo who served from 1967 until his death in 2009.

Ali Bongo's son and key advisor, Noureddin Bongo Valentin, was waiting in the wings to continue the Bongo dynasty into a third generation.

This extended rule by one family has long been a source of discontent among the population. In this respect, Gabon is not unique in Africa.

OLDER THAN BIDEN
Cameroonian President Paul Biya aims to remain in power — despite being 90 years old
Image: Jemal Countess/UPI/newscom/picture alliance


How have the coups in Niger and Gabon affected other African nations?

Hours after soldiers in Gabon named the country's new military, there was a change in neighboring Cameroon where 90-year-old President Paul Biya — who has ruled the country for more than 40 years — changed his military leadership.

Political analyst Alex Gustave Azebaze finds it difficult to draw parallels between Gabon and Cameroon, however.

"Cameroonians like me follow very closely what is happening in Gabon, without indulging in grand illusions," he told DW. "We believe in a resurgence of Cameroonian democrats from all camps to prevent the military from interfering in the political game."

Rwanda's President Paul Kagame — in office since 2003 — also retired senior military officials last week.

Shortly after Gabon's coup, Umaro Sissoco Embalo, president of Guinea-Bissau since 2020, filled two new positions with security advisors to protect him.

"It is true that coups carried out by presidential security agents have become fashionable," the president told reporters, assuring that "any suspicious move will be met with an appropriate response."

In Mozambique, President Filipe Nyusi meanwhile condemned the coup in Gabon. He said there were no reasons to justify a putsch because there are problems in every country — and coups do not solve the continent's development problems.

Nyusi added that the way democracy is exercised on the continent needs to be reviewed. He has ruled since 2015, with the state using repression to crack down on popular protests.


Part of the population supported the military coup in Niger
Image: Mahamadou Hamidou/REUTERS

Celestine Odogu of the University of Abuja in Nigeria sees the military's creeping comeback as a different kind of revolution. This, she said, can be stopped or kept in check by good governance. This is because many politicians would not keep their election promises, Odogu said.

Causes: Poverty and few reforms

Africa is the epicenter of coups, but no two are alike, according to John Chin, a postdoctoral fellow at the Carnegie Mellon Institute for Security and Technology in the US state of Pennsylvania, who researches dynamic coups.

"We can distinguish between coups that bring about regime change to overthrow democratically elected governments, as we saw in Niger. And coups in which the leadership is replaced to preserve the ruling regime, as in Chad a few years ago," Chin told DW in an interview.

But there is a wide variety of coups, Chin pointed out, and their causes are difficult to pinpoint clearly. Nevertheless, local and regional influences — such as poverty and a lack of democratic aspirations — can be cited as causes for the resurgence, rather than the presence of international actors such as Russia, France or the United States, he added.

No return to democracy


According to Chin, there were only few coup attempts in Africa in the early 2000s. But between 2020 and 2022 alone, the number jumped to 11 attempts. That figure rose to 13 this year with Niger and Gabon. The majority of successful coups happened in West Africa: two in Mali, two in Burkina Faso, one in Guinea and, most recently, one in Niger.

The political conclusion is sobering: "Those who promised a quick return to democratic government did not deliver," Chin said. Juntas in the region had made political promises under pressure from sanctions imposed by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the US, France and other countries.

After the sanctions were lifted, however, they withdrew everything: "We haven't seen a successful return to democracy in any of these countries," said Chin.

Mamady Doumbouya led the coup plotters in Guinea who in 2021 overthrew the government of President Alpha Conde

Coups unpredictable

Coup plotters have to be strategic if they want to seize and retain power, Chin said, pointing out that an important factor in their calculus is international reactions:

"When the hammer of sanctions comes down, it becomes difficult to stay in power." Therefore, he added, continuity of active diplomacy by the African Union and theinternational community plays an important role in either ending coups or, more likely, shortening the length of time that coup governments are in power.

Chin believes the coup in Gabon will not be the last on the continent. "We will see coup activity in Africa," Chin believes, adding that coup plotters often have connections among themselves.

"The thing about successful coups is that you don't easily see them coming," Chin concluded, "including in Gabon."

Moki Edwin Kindzeka, Elisabeth Assen, Ben Shemang and Christine Mhundwa contributed reporting.

This article was originally published in German. It was updated on September 8 to correct the number coups in African countries since the 2000s.

D'ETAT a practical handbook. Edward Luttwak ... technique of the coup d'état is the technique of judo: the planners of the coup must use the power of the ...
234 pages


Why do earthquakes happen?

Julia Vergin
DW
09/09/2023

Worldwide, many regions are afflicted with frequent earthquakes. While high magnitude earthquakes are rare, Morocco's Atlas Mountains are a site of heavy tectonic plate activity.

The Atlas Mountains are known as fold mountains, occurring where tectonic plates meet

An earthquake measuring 6.8 on the moment magnitude scale (MMS) has shaken Morocco. With its epicenter in the Atlas Mountains, about 70 kilometers (40 miles) from Marrakech, the earthquake was also felt in neighboring Algeria and as far north as Portugal.

The Atlas Mountains span about 2,300 kilometers across Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia. Known as fold mountains, they were created by the collision of tectonic masses: the Eurasian Plate to the north and the African Plate to the south.

"The Atlas Mountains are on the border between the two plates and are therefore a known as earthquake zone," said Fabrice Cotton, a professor of seismology at the German Research Center for Geosciences in Potsdam.

How earthquakes happen

The Earth's crust is formed like a jigsaw puzzle, with different individual pieces slotting together. The puzzle includes some gigantic oceanic plates and several smaller continental plates. Exactly how many small and very small tectonic plates there are is subject to scientific debate.

All of these plates are "floating" on the molten core of the Earth. Because magma swells from the core at certain fracture points, the plates have shifted and migrated a few centimeters every year for billions of years. They move away from each other, rub against each other or push up against each other, causing the continent above them to move. Such movements are known as plate tectonics.

These tectonic shifts regularly cause plates to collide. When the resulting tension that builds up in the plate's rock becomes too great, it can fracture and parts will break away with a jolt. Waves of pressure emanate from this epicenter and reach the Earth's surface, where they are felt as earthquakes.

Regions that fall on fault lines, where tectonic plates meet, are therefore particularly prone to earthquakes. Any quake reaching 5.0 or above on the moment magnitude scale can cause visible damage to buildings, for example.

If a quake happens under an ocean, it could cause a tsunami. These high-velocity, expanding waves can lead to deadly flooding if they hit the mainland. It is very, very difficult to predict quakes in such regions due to constant seismic activity, Cotton said.

"The only way to protect people from earthquakes is to build earthquake-proof buildings," said Cotton.

This article was originally written in German.
2/11
A magnitude 6.8 earthquake has struck Morocco with an epicenter 75 kilometers west of Marrakech, leaving more than 2,000 dead. Rescue efforts are still underway as the threat of aftershocks looms.Image: Fadel Senna/AFP/Getty Images
Difficult search-and-rescue mission
People watch from a safe distance as emergency response workers search for survivors. On Sunday, the Arabic-language Moroccan online news site Hespress reported that Spanish search-and-rescue teams with sniffer dogs had arrived in the country to support local efforts.Image: Mosa'ab Elshamy/AP/dp

Powerful earthquakes are nearly always followed by smaller aftershocks, which occur because the tectonic plates at the epicenter continue moving until they eventually settle again. Aftershocks, too, can cause serious damage. Buildings that were damaged during the original quake may collapse, leading to more deaths, injuries and displacement.

The worst earthquakes in recorded history

Andreas Noll
DW
09/09/2023

The earthquake in Morocco is already one of the worst natural disasters in the past 100 years. DW looks at some of the deadliest quakes on record.

The village of Besnia in Syria was devastated by the quake
Image: OMAR HAJ KADOUR/AFP

The earthquake of May 22, 1960, that struck the town of Valdivia in southern Chile is the most powerful ever recorded and has become known as the Great Chilean Earthquake. 
It is thought to have measured 9.5 on the moment magnitude scale (MMS). Two tectonic plates shifted by over 30 meters, releasing huge volumes of energy in seismic waves. Entire cities were reduced to rubble in just 10 minutes. About 6,000 people died and resulting tsunamis killed 130 people in Japan and more than 60 in Hawaii.

The Valdivia earthquake is the strongest ever to be recorded
Image: Getty Images/AFP

While the US was only marginally affected by that Chilean earthquake, four years later on Good Friday, it became the epicenter of the second most powerful quake ever recorded. The 9.2 magnitude Great Alaskan Earthquake lasted some four minutes and destroyed large parts of the infrastructure in southern and central Alaska. The state's largest city, Anchorage, sustained massive damage, with entire roads being destroyed. Post-quake tsunamis affected a series of coastal towns, with 139 people drowning in the ensuing floods. However, lives were saved due to the fact that it was Good Friday and many businesses were shut. There were also no children in the schools that collapsed.
Much of the Alaskan infrastructure was damaged by the Good Friday earthquake
Image: U.S. Army

In February 2023, Turkey and Syria were struck by earthquakes roughly 12 hours and 95 kilometers apart and measuring 7.8 and 7.7 on the MMS, the largest in Turkey in over eight decades. The earthquakes killed more than 50,000 people in Turkey and at least 8,400 in Syria and left an estimated 1.5 million people homeless.

Recovery teams in Antakya, Turkey, and across the region searched the rubble for days
Image: CLODAGH KILCOYNE/REUTERS

Earthquakes and tsunamis


Tsunamis often occur when the earth quakes below or near the sea. They can cause fatalities far from a quake's epicenter. Nobody died directly in the 9.1 magnitude Indian Ocean quake, also known as the Sumatra-Andaman quake of 2004, but the tsunami that it unleashed, with tidal waves of up to 30 meters, killed over 240,000 people in 14 countries in South and Southeast Asia. It was thus one of the deadliest quakes in recorded history.

The 2004 tsunami was one of the worst natural disasters in history
Image: picture-alliance/AP Photo/G. Singh

In 2011, an undersea earthquake in the Tohoku region of Japan triggered a tsunami that in turn caused the worst nuclear disaster since the Chernobyl accident of 1986. Measuring 9.1 on the moment magnitude scale, the quake caused powerful tsunami waves that flooded an area on Japan's Pacific coast greater than 500 square kilometers (193 square miles).

Some 22,000 people were killed and about 400,000 buildings collapsed or were completely destroyed. A 14-meter-high wave hit the nuclear power plant in Fukushima, causing meltdowns in three reactors and radioactive discharge that led to many countries revising their relationship with nuclear power.

In 2011, an earthquake and tsunami caused devastation to parts of north-eastern Japan
Image: Asashi Shimbun/epa/dpa/picture alliance


Two deadly quakes in China


On January 23, 1556, an earthquake occurred in the Shaanxi province of central China. It was described as follows by chroniclers of the time: "Various misfortunes took place. Mountains and rivers changed places and roads were destroyed. In some places, the ground suddenly rose up and formed new hills, or it sank abruptly and became new valleys. In other areas, a stream burst out in an instant, or the ground broke and new gullies appeared. Huts, official houses, temples and city walls collapsed all of a sudden."

Some 830,000 people are thought to have been killed in the quake, which is estimated to have measured 8.25 on the MMS, and its aftermath. It is the deadliest recorded quake in history.

Probably the second deadliest earthquake in recorded history and the worst of the past 100 years also occurred in China. At 3:42 local time on July 28, 1976, a 7.1 magnitude quake almost destroyed the city of Tangshan, which today has a population of over 7 million. The epicenter was 20 kilometers southwest of Tangshan, but the tremors were felt 140 kilometers away in Beijing. Over five million homes were uninhabitable afterward, and hundreds of thousands of people died. Though the authorities officially registered 242,000 fatalities, the real death toll is estimated at 650,000.

Much of the city of Tangshan lay in rubble after an earthquake in 1976
Image: Imago/Xinhua

One of the worst of a series of earthquakes to have struck East Asia in the 1920s also took place in China, the magnitude 7.8 Haiyuan earthquake of December 16, 1920. Landslides and ground fissures buried villages and caused rivers to change course. Some 200,000 people were killed.


One of the poorest countries in the world, Haiti has yet to recover from the devastation caused by an earthquake in 2010
Image: Getty Images/AFP/J. Barret

International relief aid

These days, as is the case today in Syria and Turkey, international relief organizations are quick to mobilize when earthquakes occur. This also happened in 2010 when an earthquake struck Haiti at 16:53 local time on January 12. With a magnitude of 7, it was not the most powerful quake of the past century, but it was one of the worst in terms of its devastating impact.

Haiti, the poorest country in the western hemisphere, was ill-prepared for yet another natural disaster. In some regions, 90% of homes were destroyed. There are still no exact casualty figures, but international organizations estimate that the number of victims lies between 200,000 and 500,000.

This article was originally written in German.

Originally published on February 10, 2023, this article was updated and republished on September 9, 2023, following the deadly earthquake in Morocco.

Utility Negligence In Maui Fires Sparks Nationwide Infrastructure Debate

  • Maui's wildfires, linked to utility negligence and aging power lines, highlight the deteriorating state of U.S. energy infrastructure.

  • Several U.S. states face challenges due to fragmented grid systems, outdated roads, bridges, and other critical infrastructure, exacerbated by climate change.

  • Despite governmental efforts like the $1.2 trillion Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill, experts estimate an investment gap of almost $2.6 trillion in the coming decade for infrastructure needs.

The recent wildfires in Maui, Hawaii demonstrated the importance of oversight and accountability when it comes to utility companies. These companies control vast amounts of power and must have a clear plan to respond to extreme weather events and other situations to prevent catastrophe. But what’s also been shown is the severe challenge of the ageing U.S. energy infrastructure. Wildfires and other catastrophic events, many caused by outdated infrastructure, have been an increasingly common occurrence in recent years, in states such as California and Texas. But how much comes down to utility companies and how much is down to public and private investment in a wide range of infrastructure?  

Following the recent devastating wildfires in Maui, the county is suing the Hawaiian Electric company for damages. During the fires, more than 100 people were killed, with the historic town of Lahaina being destroyed. Maui County claims that the downed power lines operated by the utility contributed to the fires. Hawaiian Electric has been accused of negligence for not shutting off power following a “red flag” weather warning by the National Weather Service, due to high winds from Hurricane Dora. 

In extreme weather events, high winds can knock down power lines, which can cause a fire during dry or drought conditions. This is a well-known risk, with over 32,000 wildfires started by transmission and distribution lines in the U.S. between 1992 and 2020, according to data from the U.S. Forest Service. But as well as demonstrating the responsibility of utility companies to create clear emergency strategies to follow, and states to establish better oversight measures, it also once again calls into question the dangers of ageing U.S. energy infrastructure. 

In states, such as California, Texas and Florida, that regularly experience severe weather, the ageing energy infrastructure has repeatedly been called into question following several failings in recent years. Many states simply do not have enough money to invest in the complete overhaul that is required to modernise their energy infrastructure. Further, the national grid system in the U.S. is highly fragmented, meaning that several states and regions run on completely different systems, under different utilities and different standards than others. This makes it extremely difficult to modernise infrastructure on a country-wide scale. 

And it doesn’t stop at the U.S. grid structure, with major concerns over ageing roads, bridges, dams, and electrical grids that keep the country running, which are decades old and often in dire need of repair. Infrastructure issues that were previously overlooked due to cost of a lack of awareness about the problem are now being seen as much more serious due to climate change. As weather events worldwide are worsening, with more widespread droughts, stronger storms and other unexpected events, people are putting increasing pressure on governments to address these issues. In turn, governments are putting mounting pressure on utility companies to ensure their safety strategies address the risks of a constantly changing world. 

For example, on 11 June this year, a tanker truck transporting gasoline on the I-95 in Philadelphia crashed and caught fire. The overpass above the crash, which carries around 160,000 vehicles a day, collapsed. This was blamed on either the heat of the flames or the explosion weakening the steel beams. However, some have questioned the fragility of the state’s ageing infrastructure and the need to invest in repairing key infrastructure to avoid future catastrophes. 

The U.S. government is aware of the rising concerns of poor infrastructure and has responded to these fears with the passing of the $1.2 trillion Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill and President Biden’s $2.3 trillion Build Back Better Act in 2021. These are aimed at developing and improving a wide range of critical U.S. infrastructure over the next decade. But public financing schemes will have to help attract a great deal more in private investment if the government hopes to successfully address the country’s failing infrastructure. 

A recent American Society of Civil Engineers assessment suggests there is an infrastructure investment gap of almost $2.6 trillion this decade, which could ultimately cost the U.S. $10 trillion in lost GDP by the end of 2039 if left unaddressed. This report covers sectors such as roads, electricity, airports, telecommunication, rail, water, and ports. Several analysts agree with this large funding gap. For example, McKinsey researchers suggest that $150 billion per year will be required between 2017 and 2030 to manage the country’s infrastructure needs. 

While the government’s new infrastructure laws go a long way to addressing the country’s ageing infrastructure problem – from transport to energy – there is still a long way to go to creating a cohesive plan and providing enough funding to ensure the critical infrastructure across the country is stable. The government will have to work with state powers, private companies, and utilities to ensure that improvements to U.S. infrastructure are being made in a less fragmented manner, to help establish a long-term plan for infrastructure across different sectors and states. 

By Felicity Bradstock for Oilprice.com

Guyana's Oil Boom Challenges OPEC+ Dominance

  • Guyana is expected to pump 1.2 million barrels of crude oil per day by 2027, surpassing many OPEC members, driven by Exxon's development of the Stabroek Block.

  • The high-quality light sweet crude oil, low breakeven prices, and successful exploration campaigns are attracting immense international interest in Guyana's oil sector.

  • Guyana's burgeoning oil production threatens to diminish OPEC Plus's influence, even as the cartel attempts to bring the country into its fold.

In a mere four years, Guyana went from first discovery to first oil, a rapid timeframe in an industry where it can take years to bring major energy projects online. The former British colony is now a major South American oil producer and global petroleum exporter. 

As a result, Guyana is benefiting from a tremendous economic windfall, with the country emerging as the world’s fastest-growing economy with 2022 gross domestic product (GDP) expanding by a stunning 62%. Industry consultancies and the government in Georgetown expect Guyana to be pumping 1.2 million barrels of crude oil per day by 2027, a figure greater than many OPEC members. Exxon’s commitment to developing the offshore 6.6-million-acre Stabroek Block indicates oil output could soar even higher. This has the potential to alter global energy market dynamics and challenge the price-making power of the OPEC Plus consortium.

Data from Guyana’s Ministry of Natural Resources shows the country of less than one million was lifting 351,600 barrels of oil per day at the end of July 2023. That production volume pumped by the Liza Destiny and Unity floating production storage and offloading vessels (FPSOs) is greater than their combined nameplate capacity of 340,000 barrels per day. Exxon, which holds a 45% stake in the Stabroek Block and is the operator, prioritized development of the block in late-2020 due to the Liza oilfield’s low breakeven price of $25 per barrel to $35 per barrel and high-quality light sweet crude oil. That saw the global energy supermajor ramp up activity with a large exploration drilling campaign that eventually yielded over 30 discoveries and more than 11 billion barrels of oil resources in the Stabroek Block.

Since the first oil discovery in the Stabroek Block was made in 2015, the Exxon-led consortium comprised of Hess, with a 30% interest, and CNOOC, holding a 25% stake, have approved six projects with the initial Liza phase-1 and 2 developments complete. There are four more operations being developed, which, on start-up, will significantly lift oil production to at least 1.2 million barrels per day, and perhaps more. These include the 220,000 barrel per day Payara operation, with the first oil slated for late 2023 and the 250,000 barrels per day Yellowtail project, which will commence operations in 2025. Earlier this year, the consortium approved the $12.7 billion 250,000 barrel-per-day Uaru project, which is expected to start production during 2026. In the latest news, Exxon and its partners in the prolific Stabroek Block announced they will proceed with the sixth development, the nearly $13 billion Whiptail project. This facility will consist of 72 wells with a nameplate production capacity of 250,000 barrels per day and commence operations in late 2027. 

Once all of those assets are operational, Exxon will have the capacity to lift just over 1.3 million barrels per day from the Stabroek Block. Each of those operations, like the functioning Liza Phase-1 and Phase-2 FPSOs, possesses the potential to pump more petroleum than the designated capacity. For this reason, oil output from the Stabroek Block could easily surpass the 1.3 million barrels expected. By 2027, Guyana’s petroleum output could very well surpass the forecast of 1.2 million barrels daily, which will see the country exceed the petroleum output of many OPEC members and become the world's 16th largest oil producer. 

The immense international interest in Guyana is being driven by a high exploration success rate and substantial offshore petroleum potential, which appears to exceed that estimated by the U.S. Geological Survey. The light sweet oil being discovered, with the Liza grade possessing an API gravity of 32 degrees and 0.58% sulfur content, is easier and cheaper for refineries to process into high-quality fuels further adding to offshore Guyana’s popularity. According to Rystad Energy, the carbon intensity of the oil being extracted is among some of the lowest globally. That is an extremely attractive attribute for foreign energy companies at a time when big oil is being pressured to sharply reduce emissions and become carbon neutral. Industry low breakeven prices, estimated by Rystad to average $28 per barrel, make operating in offshore Guyana highly profitable, especially with Brent selling for around $90 a barrel. 

For those reasons, Guyana’s rising petroleum output will not stop at 1.2 million or 1.3 million barrels per day, nor will discovered oil resources remain at around 11 billion barrels, both will expand at a solid clip. Earlier this year, Guyana’s Environmental Protection Agency greenlighted Exxon’s 35-well drilling campaign for the Stabroek Block, which will lead to further oil discoveries based on the supermajor’s success rate. Other foreign energy companies are investing in exploration assets and drilling activities in offshore Guyana. Georgetown’s pending first-time oil auction, which has been delayed multiple times since December 2022, captured considerable interest. Reportedly, Brazil’s national oil company Petrobras is eyeing investing in Guyana while French supermajor TotalEnergies, which made five commercial discoveries in nearby Block 58 offshore Suriname, has interests in Guyana’s Canje and Kanuku Blocks.

Guyana’s growing production and discovered oil resources will boost global supply at a crucial time, which will diminish the influence of the OPEC Plus cartel. In recognition of this and Guyana’s tremendous petroleum potential, OPEC is attempting to woo the former British colony to join its ranks. The cartel has invited representatives from Guyana to participate in its meetings in Europe but has yet to officially invite the country to join the cartel. Regardless, Georgetown appears reticent to join OPEC, especially with membership requiring Guyana to comply with various rules and regulations. Indeed, such a move would place limitations on Guyana’s oil industry by requiring compliance with OPEC Plus production quotas, a key reason regional neighbor Ecuador exited the cartel in 2020.

Guyana’s explosive arrival as a serious global oil producer, going from first discovery to first oil in a mere four years, will challenge OPEC’s dominance. When coupled with Brazil’s plans to become the world’s fourth largest producer, South America will reemerge as a major petroleum-producing region with the capability to challenge OPEC Plus’s role as a global price maker. These are all significant developments for the world’s largest oil consumer, the U.S., where Gulf Coast refineries, since 2019 when President Donald Trump ratcheted up sanctions against Venezuelan oil have been seeking alternate sources of supply. It will also blunt the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s at times antagonistic attitude toward the U.S., which is responsible for higher oil prices.

By Matthew Smith for Oilprice.com

China Races Ahead In Global Nuclear Power Development

  • China currently has 55 operational nuclear reactors and 21 more under construction, with aims to diversify and lead in clean energy sources.

  • The U.S. remains the highest generator of nuclear power with 93 operational reactors but has seen a decline in new projects since the mid-1980s.

  • China's success in the nuclear sector stems from government support, state financing, and a commitment to expanding nuclear capacity to 150 GW in the next 15 years

China is by far the world leader in nuclear reactor development at present. The country has been rapidly expanding its nuclear energy industry in line with its renewable energy development, to diversity and become a leader in several clean energy sources. In contrast, the development of new plants in the U.S. has gradually dwindled in recent decades, following public and government scepticism around nuclear safety and the high costs involved with new projects. So, will China achieve its aim of becoming the world leader in nuclear power in the long term? 

China currently has 55 nuclear reactors in operation, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). In 2021, nuclear power contributed 5.02 percent of the country’s energy mix, a figure that is expected to increase significantly with the opening of new facilities. During the 13th Five-Year Plan period, China rolled out several renewable energy projects, increasing the figure for non-fossil energy consumption to 15.9 percent. The 14th Five-Year Plan period is aimed at achieving peak carbon emissions by 2030 and net-zero emissions by 2060, meaning that China needs to rapidly develop a wide range of clean energy sources. 

In 2007, the Chinese government released the Medium and Long-Term Development Plan for Nuclear Power (2005-2020). Between 2017 and 2021, 16 nuclear units were put into commercial operation, with construction commencing on 13 new units. And by the end of 2021, the total installed capacity of nuclear power in China stood at 53.2 GW. In recent years, the Chinese government has focused on improving nuclear safety, through stronger regulations and safety standards. In addition, it has carried out a public attention and awareness campaign on nuclear power safety to ensure that its society is aware of its nuclear power programme and understands the emergency responses in place, to improve understanding and preparedness. 

China now has 21 new nuclear reactors under construction, which will have a capacity for generating more than 21 GW of electricity. This is two and a half times more than any other country’s nuclear construction pipeline. This is followed by India, which has 8 reactors currently under construction, expected to produce 6 GW of electricity, and Turkey with 4 reactors in development, aiming for 4.5 GW. 

In contrast, the U.S. currently has just one nuclear reactor under construction, the fourth reactor at the Vogtle power plant in Georgia. It is expected to generate 1 GW of electricity. However, there is evidence of the United States’ prior dominance in nuclear power, in its 93 existing operational nuclear reactors. The U.S. currently generates over 95 GW of electricity from nuclear sources, making it the highest generator of nuclear power worldwide. It is followed by France, with 56 operating nuclear reactors, capable of generating 61 GW of electricity. China comes in third worldwide when it comes to existing, operational nuclear reactors. 

Despite the high number of nuclear reactors currently in operation in the U.S., the lack of new projects in recent decades suggests its fall from dominance. Kenneth Luongo, president and founder of the Partnership for Global Security, believes this trend started in the mid-1980s, which has since made way for China as the “determined and pacing leader in global nuclear ambition at the moment.” China began developing its nuclear power as U.S. interest in the energy source was waning. Luongo explains, “China began building its first reactor in 1985, just as the U.S. nuclear build-out began a steep decline.” 

This represents a broader global trend. Approximately 70 percent of existing nuclear capacity is located in member states of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). However, almost 75 percent of the nuclear reactors that are currently under construction are in non-OECD countries, with half of those in China. The Asian giant is developing its nuclear energy capacity for several reasons, including the rapid growth of its population; to become competitive with other global leaders, and the aim of diversifying its energy mix to include more clean energy sources. Meanwhile, the U.S. has continued to rely heavily on its existing nuclear reactors as well as oil and gas, while developing renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar power. 

China has succeeded in overtaking other countries in nuclear power mainly thanks to the government’s dedication to rapidly expanding the sector. The country has long been pro-nuclear, but decades of planning have led to a projected scaling up of China’s nuclear capacity to 150 GW in the next 15 years. The government began by buying reactors from France the U.S. and Russia, with funds coming from its booming economy. But China has since begun to build its own reactors, with expertise coming from France. It is now able to develop multiple nuclear units at a lower cost thanks to state financing, a state-supported supply chain, and the government’s commitment to the development of nuclear power. 

By Felicity Bradstock for Oilprice.com

U$A 

IRA Subsidies Spark Green Energy Gold Rush In Conservative Regions

ALL CAPITALI$M IS STATE CAPITALI$M

  • Massive federal funding available for wind, solar, and EV initiatives are prompting conservative states to re-evaluate low-carbon energy projects.

  • West Virginia, traditionally coal-dependent, approved three renewable projects worth $400 million, driven by the prospect of job creation.

  • Most of the Inflation Reduction Act funding for renewable energy is being directed to conservative states, with 27 out of 30 projects located in these areas, valued at over $35 billion.

Massive federal subsidies for wind and solar energy are prompting conservative state governments to reconsider their opinions on low-carbon generation capacity or, indeed, consider having some.

With several hundred billion available in the form of subsidies for solar and wind farms, EV manufacturing, and batteries, among others, the Inflation Reduction Act passed by Congress last year has prompted a race among states for a piece of the subsidy pie.

It’s not just the money, either. West Virginia recently approved a titanium manufacturing project led by Berkshire Hathaway that will be powered by a solar+battery installation. It is one of three low-carbon energy projects the state has approved over the past year, the Wall Street Journal reported this week, worth $400 million in total.

This is a major breakthrough for a state so heavily dependent on coal it generates 90% of its electricity from it. The heart of coal country also, unsurprisingly, has a strong pro-coal lobby influencing energy decisions on the state government level. What did the trick, it appears, was the promise of new job creation.

The Berkshire factory, for instance, will employ some 200 people in its titanium production plant and another hundred in a facility for the production of utility-scale battery storage. That facility is being developed by a Berkshire partner in the West Virginia project, Michigan-based Our Next Energy.

Jobs are changing minds in conservative states, which also just so happen to have plenty of low-carbon resources, meaning a lot of sun and a lot of wind. Indeed, early this year, the Wall Street Journal reported that most of the IRA money for low-carbon energy was going into red states. Driven by the promise of generous subsidies, companies have also made pledges worth tens of billions for these states.

As of January, the report said, out of 30 low-carbon and other transition-related projects that had a location included in the description, 27 were in red states. Together, these 27 projects were worth over $35 billion.

Of course, investment pledges are not actual investments, and yet the abundant federal government support will likely motivate a lot of companies to really spend the promised sums. As for job creation, there seems to be a widespread misconception that everyone involved in every wind or solar project gets a job for life. This is not the case.

The number of people directly involved on a permanent basis in transition activities, that is, wind and solar power, battery and EV production, and green hydrogen, tends to be smaller than politicians like to boast. Scotland is a case in point: its government promised a few years ago offshore wind would create as many as 28,000 new jobs. The number of full-time jobs that industry actually created, as of 2021, was 3,100.

This has sparked an effort to define what a green job actually means. Perhaps this effort will spread to the United States as well as job creation as approving low-carbon generation and other transition-related projects gains popularity in the states with the most abundant wind, solar, and land resources.

While it becomes clear which of the prospective transition investors was indeed serious about it, the race between states will continue—there is still a lot of money to be distributed—and it will cost them money.

The FT wrote about that in May, saying states were competing to offer the best incentives to prospective transition investors looking for a place to set up shop and benefit from the IRA subsidy package. Some have questioned the outcome of such an approach to attracting investment, noting there is no certainty such incentives are necessary at all and what they would realistically achieve in terms of returns.

One executive at an accountability research company described the situation graphically: “The states are free to overspend and rip each other’s guts out and compete, race to the bottom, and waste gazillions of dollars,” Greg LeRoy from Good Jobs First told the FT.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com 

 Africa’s Energy Transition Plan Is Nonsense

  • The International Energy Agency this week reminded the world that Africa is ripe for a wind and solar revolution.

  • Africa currently accounts for a measly 4% of global carbon dioxide emissions.

  • High levels of debt in African countries were recently noted as one of the obstacles to the continent's full utilization of low-carbon resources.

Africa is a treasure trove of metals and minerals and home to some of the world's best natural resources, including wind and solar.

Africa currently accounts for a measly 4% of global carbon dioxide emissions. A variety of organizations want it to stay that way.

From the International Energy Agency, the IMF, and the World Bank to private businesses and nonprofits, transition advocates want Africa to go straight from pre-industrial to net-zero, skipping the oil and gas era.

That would be quite a feat.

The reason Africa has the lowest emission footprint is that hundreds of millions of people on the continent has no access to electricity. The reason they don't have access to electricity is that there is no power generation capacity or transmission infrastructure and not enough cheap coal and gas to power it.

Of course, there is also the case of South Africa, where years of mismanagement left the country in the dark last year, or Nigeria, which can only generate enough electricity for not even half its population despite its significant oil wealth. On the whole, however, Africans are short on power because they don't have enough capacity to generate it. And nowhere near enough money to build it.

It is in this context that the International Energy Agency this week reminded the world that Africa is ripe for a wind and solar revolution, at least when it comes to resources. The IEA also noted, however, that Africa is only getting 2% of global investments in low-carbon energy, just as it gets a tiny sliver of overall energy investments.

This, the IEA said, needs to change if Africa is to exploit these massive resources for low-carbon energy, as it should, according to the agency. Because, right now, "The cost of capital for utility-scale clean energy projects on the continent is at least two to three times higher than in advanced economies. This prevents developers from pursuing commercially viable projects that can deliver affordable energy solutions."

This much higher cost of capital has to do with real and perceived risks that are holding investors back. These risks have a lot to do with the uncertainty of returns on these hypothetical investments, given the high poverty levels across most of Africa.

Low-carbon energy may be good for the environment, but it also costs money. Building the infrastructure necessary to bring this energy to people also costs money. A lot of it. There are many in Africa who cannot afford such energy when the cost is calculated on a basis that is more realistic than the highly popular levelized cost of electricity.

On that more realistic basis, wind and solar require dispatchable backup generation capacity as well. Or massive batteries. Neither option comes free. And African governments are up to their necks in debt already.

Indeed, the high levels of debt in African countries were recently noted as one of the obstacles to the continent's full utilization of low-carbon resources. And it's a big one.

"At the moment, we've got developing countries paying way more in debt repayments back to richer countries than they ever hope to receive in climate finance or support," Tom Mitchell, director of sustainability think tank the International Institute for Environment and Development, said at an event in the UK, as quoted by Reuters.

Despite this state of affairs, those same richer countries, through their lending institutions, have essentially told African governments that they will not receive any financial support for developing their oil and gas resources. In other words, either invest in wind and solar—while repaying your debts—or sink because you can't finance oil and gas exploration.

Many African leaders have called out the hypocrisy: Europe and North America reaped the full range of benefits from hydrocarbons for decades, and now they want to deny Africa those same benefits.

There are now oil and gas activists in Africa who advocate for more, not less, hydrocarbons for African countries because of all the benefits they provide, from automation of many tasks that are now done manually to fertilizers, which would greatly improve crop yields like they do in Europe and North America.

There are also the international oil companies, which, despite their appearance as an industry in its own transition, somehow still manage to do some oil and gas exploration. Including in Africa.

TotalEnergies started drilling at the Tilenga oil project in Uganda in August, even though it is subjected to considerable pressure from environmentalists, including through a couple of lawsuits

Namibia is shaping up as the next Guyana, with discoveries made by Shell and TotalEnergies suggesting reserves of at least 11 billion barrels of oil equivalent.

Earlier this year, an Australian company, Invictus Energy, drilled a wildcat in Zimbabwe that confirmed the presence of light oil and condensate.

Oil and gas exploration in Africa is progressing without much media noise but with what appears to be strong government support, even as some of these governments are also 100% pro-transition.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com