Registered Professional Engineer in NC. Specialized as a Coal power generation engineer. Began career in 1962. Worked as electrician at SPS Technologies, Utility Engineer at Mobil Oil Corp, at Babcock & Wilcox as a Results Engineer, Riley Stoker as Senior Field Service Engineer, Carolina Power and Light Company as a Principal Engineer and later, Operations Superintendent of Roxboro Generating Plant, head of Technical Services Department of Flame Refractories and then founded Storm Technologies in 1992. Served as a contributing Editor to POWER Magazine and Instructor of Power Generation Short Courses at Storm Technologies and Williamson College of the Trades. My largest current concern is the inadequate understanding of the general public on the importance of energy to humankind and western civilization. My goal for this Blog is to share my knowledge and experiences regarding Energy and Electricity Generation. Specifically, I will endeavor to provide posts of some reasons why and how reasonable cost energy and electricity lead to Economic Prosperity and at the same time, protect our environment & support clean air and clean water.
This is a new blog site to replace dickstormprobizblog.org. The purpose of this is to make the title more clearly related with the posted content. The name of the site was chosen from the blog used by the late Mr. Donn Dears who wrote over 1600 blog posts and numerous books on this subject. Mr. Dears was one of the men that inspired me to write for the purpose of educating those who are interested in energy and electricity generation but do not work in the industry as we have. The site and my efforts are dedicated to the memory of Donn Dears a fine American Patriot, engineer and expert in energy and electric power generation.
This is done in the spirit of increasing the Energy IQ of the American public.
It is now officially winter. I think this is an appropriate time to review eleven advantages of coal fuel for electric power generation.
Coal is Proven because it provided nearly 50% of America’s electricity generation up till about 2012. The peak year for coal production was 2008 when America produced over 1 billion tons of coal. Coal has been displaced by natural gas as the #1 fuel for American power production but the infrastructure remains to produce twice as much power as we did in 2024 with coal. Even today, especially in the winter, coal is depended on by some RTO’s for as much as 40% of the winter power generation.
Energy density favors coal. A 2,000 MW coal plant can be comfortably sited on a small parcel of land. A wind or solar farm would require much more space. For example a 2,500 MW coal plant capable of generating electricity 24/7, 300+ days per year (allowing outage time for maintenance), will require about a few square miles of land. A solar farm with battery storage will require between 100 and 200 square miles of land to intermittentlyproduce 2,500 MW of electricity.
Coal plants, when properly maintained can operate at capacity factors of over 85% with reliability of over 90%. Unfortunately, because many coal plants have not been maintained as they were prior to 2012, the reliability has declined. However, the proven top reliability is a matter of record.
Coal Plants are Affordable. The states with the lowest cost electricity typically use coal fuel for a large portion of their power generation. Some examples are the states of North Dakota, Utah, Wyoming, Missouri, West Virginia and Montana.
On site Fuel Storage of a coal plant is intrinsic in the design. A large coal plant may store up to three months of fuel to operate at high load factor. Gas turbines can have oil fuel backup for days and solar or wind farms may use batteries for hours of backup. But when it comes to onsite storage of fuel, nuclear and coal are far superior.
America is the Saudi Arabia of Coal America has hundreds of years of some of the highest quality coal reserves in the world. Coal power contributes to energy security and energy independence.
Coal Power is Dispatchable, when the customer Demands the power, a coal plant can ramp up generation when needed whether daytime, night time or when the wind is not blowing. Winter and summer.
Coal Plants are Robust and live a long life. It is not uncommon to see coal plants running 50 to 60 years and beyond. That is, when they are properly maintained. The jury is still out on the life of solar and wind farms. However, their early demise from extreme weather has been documented such as the hail storms in Texas and wind farm blade failures off-shore in the Atlantic Ocean.
Coal Plant Manufacturing Supply-Chain is similar to gas turbines. That is, limited. However, America has built thousands of large coal units and not too long ago, we could startup a 720 MW coal plant about four years after the contract was signed. America can do it again, if we want to.
Personnel Training of Coal Plant Operations and Maintenance professionals has been accomplished, is well documented and proven. Like the manufacturing supply chain, the talent supply-chain can also be re-established.
As I started this article saying, it is the beginning of winter and by the end of the winter I predict that the general public may come to appreciate coal plants for the advantages they provide. If there are winter Blackouts such as winter storm URI in 2021, the public and policy makers may wake up? I hope so. Here above are my top ten reasons why I support building new coal plants.
The last and perhaps most important reason to build new coal plants is that coal can provide the primary energy needed to increase the U.S. Total Primary Energy to the range of 110-120 Quadrillion BTUs/year.
My previous article on the growth of electricity Demand will require 32-100 GW of new generation capacity per year between now and 2050 is here. Long story shortened, we have the infrastructure in place to provide 25 Quadrillion BTUs of coal power. Increasing the total Primary Energy Consumption to say 110 or 120 Quadrillion BTUs will be difficult and risky to depend on natural gas alone. Nuclear, with all due respect and I support new nuclear plants, will take decades to get built in the GW capacities needed. My answer: Build coal plants now.
Yours very truly,
Dick Storm, December 21, 2025
References and information for further reading and research:
The term BULK POWER means just that, Bulk Power in hundreds and thousands of Megawatts. America needs huge Bulk Power generation additions of about 30,000 MW per year, not small scale R&D projects of variable generation or unproven new SMRs. Perhaps some time in the future renewables and new nuclear will be viable and competitive. However for now, we need 100-800 GW of new electricity generation to replace the more than 200 GW of reliable coal plants that were either shut down or planned for shut down soon. Satisfying the growing electricity demand of the future requires lots (Lots= 30,000 MW each year) of new generation capable of 24/7 generation.
When I joined CP&L in 1973 I entered a door emblazoned with a sign: Bulk Power Supply. Then I thought the name odd and frankly, I have not seen it since. However behind that door were the men and women that managed the generation assets of CP&L which at the time was only about 5,000 MW. The Bulk Power Supply came from seven fossil plants. Those plants were; Cape Fear, Weatherspooon, H.F. Lee, Sutton, Roxboro, Asheville and Robinson, including (1973) one lone nuclear (H.B. Robinson #2) and some small hydroelectric plants in the western corner of N.C. Bulk Power Supply was measured in Megawatts. Many of those coal units (CP&L has been absorbed into Duke Energy of the Carolinas) have been shut down. Most of them have been demolished as shown on the video of the Sutton plant implosion.
These coal plants should have been replaced with new coal generation plants of higher efficiency and even better flue gas cleaning. America is paying a price which will rise further, for the loss of this vital generation capacity without replacing it in kind.
The Bulk Power Supply of America needs to grow by about 800 GW by 2050. Increasing the Bulk Power Supply is a huge challenge which has been vastly underestimated. Do the math. Building new 800,000 MW of capacity in 25 years is 32,000 MW per year of new dispatchable, reliable and affordable new capacity.
Unfortunately, I think many Utilities and government officials have under-estimated the enormity of building 800 GW of new power generation. I tried to lay out my perspective in a presentation to the Coal Institute in July. 800 GW of new generation capacity is equivalent to building over 325 coal plants the size of Duke Energy’s Roxboro Coal Plant (2462 MW) or building 360 new nuclear units such as Southern Company’s Vogtle Units # 3 & 4. (2200 MW)
How About the Primary Energy to Generate 800 GW of New Electricity Generation?
As mentioned above, many experienced authors of energy and electricity generation do not dwell on the importance of primary energy, so I will. Primary energy is not magic and it is not free as the proponents for wind and solar suggest.
The results are now in for “the Global Science Project” of experimentation with wind and solar aka “The Green New Deal”. One simply has to observe the actual electricity prices in Germany, Hawaii, Spain, California, the UK and Scandinavia to know that wind and solar cost more, are not reliable and of course they are not dispatchable.
Primary Energy
Electricity is secondary energy, it must be produced from Primary energy. In the vernacular of physics one Kilowatt hour of electricity is equivalent to 3,412.6 BTUs of thermal energy. Thermal energy has proven to be the most reliable, dispatchable and affordable. The reporting of Total Energy use by countries and the world is usually done in BTUs for U.S. customary units or in Exajoules in International units. The total world, according to the IEA has used right at 600 Exajoules (rounded from 592) and is shown below in a graphic from the Visual Capitalist. The conversion of EJ to Quadrillion BTU is EJ x 0.9478=QBTU. Example 592 EJ x 0.9478= 562 Quadrillion BTU.
The U.S. uses almost one fifth of the world’s primary energy. A reminder that economic prosperity is driven by energy. America is still the world’s #1 economy and therefore it should not be a surprise that we use almost a fifth of the world’s total primary energy consumption. This is Primary energy used not only for electricity generation but also for transportation, Industrial production, heating, cooking and commercial uses. Remember the phrase “Electrify Everything?”
The First Prerequisite to a thriving economy is that there must be available, reliable and affordable Primary energy to generate that electricity.
America Uses about 100 Quadrillion BTUs Annually of Primary Energy
The LLNL Sankey Diagram shown below details the Primary Energy flows from sources to consumption. The U.S. has used right at 100 Quadrillion BTUs for the last 20 years. A little more than a third of total primary energy is used for electricity generation. (37.7%)
The chart above is from 2022. The one below from 2009. I used this chart in a presentation to the ASME in 2011 to attempt to impress the members with the importance of coal. At the time, America was using coal for about 45% of our electricity generation and the primary energy used to generate that power was about 20 Quadrillion BTUs of coal fuel. As can be seen from the two charts, natural gas increased about 10 Quads and coal decreased a similar amount. Basically, substituting natural gas for coal power production.
Self Sabotaging of the U.S. Bulk Power Supply
Since President Obama’s two term escalated war on coal over 50% of America’s reliable, affordable, Dispatchable and energy secure power generation has been shut down. I have called this self-sabotage. Mostly as a result of Federal Regulations, especially the politically inspired (not based on human health or science) EPA Endangerment Finding. But also due to NGOs and other voices working very effectively to demonize coal power. America had the most reliable, least expensive electricity supply in 2010 and the forces against coal power have steadily weakened our energy security, reliability and affordability. Electricity prices are climbing and will continue to do so as more unreliable, variable generation is forced onto the Grid, and backed up by natural gas fuel. Low prices of natural gas are not guaranteed into the future and fuel is the major cost component for thermal power generation. If the fuel cost doubles, so does the production cost of electricity.
The chart below from the IEEFA shows the path of coal free power generation. Some states and countries are ahead of my state of S.C. and the electricity costs in those states that have shut down their coal plants has escalated sharply. Germany has suffered from significant De-Industrialization as a result of forcing wind and solar on the nation. If America continues the path set by Net-Zero Carbon advocates, we all will join Hawaii, California, Spain, Germany, the UK, Massachusetts and Connecticut with higher cost power and possible de-industrialization.
Thanks to President Trump and Chris Wright, America’s energy regulatory policy is somewhat corrected. However, some states, even S.C. still have laws on the books to exit coal. I feel this is energy suicide. Coal is a national treasure that should be utilized. In fact, in my opinion, it is the best and only viable choice of primary energy to provide the needed electricity generation between now and 2050. A coal plant should be able to be built in four years. We have done it before and can do it again!
The Future 2025-2050
Electricity generation capacity will need to increase dramatically over the next 25 years. The projected growth has been well documented by many others including Stephen Heins, Thomas J. Shepstone, Jr., the ICF, NEMA and others. What is needed is an enormous amount of new, Dispatchable, reliable and affordable Bulk Power. About 800,000 MW of new Bulk Power. he workforce challenge is a topic to cover on another day.In my analysis, nuclear will play an important part. So will natural gas. However, there are three limits to just how much nuclear and natural gas can supply. These three constraints are Supply-Chain, pipelines and achieving a Balanced generation portfolio. The nuclear supply chain limits have been discussed before and although proven and an excellent clean choice, nuclear seems decades away before the needed capacity can be built. For example, it took America over 30 years (1957-1987) to design and build the existing nuclear fleet of about 97,000 MW of capacity. We now need eight times the nuclear fleet that was built over 30 years. Keep in mind, the legacy nuclear units built 1957-1987 were constructed when the Supply-Chain was well established, there were thousands of trained and experienced engineers at B&W, Combustion-Engineering and Westinghouse and craftsmen were much more abundant in the workforce. Many experienced engineers and craftsmen are now retired. Rebuilding the workforce is a topic for another day. Here is a sampling of the challenge of building 100’s of new thermal power plants of either coal, nuclear or gas fuel:
The experience per capita in the labor pool is plummeting. Consider these facts:
The U.S. construction industry faces a shortage of 2.3 million workers as of 2023, with 75% of contractors reporting difficulty finding qualified labor—up from 66% in 2021. [wifitalents.com] By 2025, the industry must attract 454,000 additional workers beyond normal hiring just to meet demand. [contractormag.com] Apprenticeship enrollments declined 15% between 2019 and 2022, shrinking the pipeline of skilled workers. [wifitalents.com] Nearly 20% of construction workers are over 55, accelerating retirements while fewer young workers enter the trade. [abctn.org]
“Just in Time” Primary Energy
Today about 45% of the U.S. electricity generation at peak times is provided by natural gas through “just in time” pipelines. Not only is the Supply-Chain of new gas turbine plants limited but so are the pipelines and fuel supply. In my analysis, we already have too much dependence on pipeline provided natural gas. Remember the Colonial Pipeline Hack of 2021? Coal plants have the inherent advantage of being capable of storing several months of fuel on site.
The best choice for a Balanced Portfolio then, in my analysis is to build new coal plants. In Dick Storm’s Perfect World of Power Generation, I would like to see a Balanced generation portfolio of 30% coal, nuclear, gas, with 10% renewables. Illustration from the Coal Institute presentation.
Conclusion
The policy planners and utilities have gravely underestimated the growth of electricity Demand and now are catching up by using the “Easy Button” of purchasing gas turbines for backup power for wind and solar. Most of the capital being invested in new generation in this calendar year is for solar, wind and BESS (Battery Electricity Storage). This is a mistake that will cost Americans dearly.
President Trump, Chris Wright and Lee Zeldin have done the best they can to correct decades of poor flawed planning by the EPA and Congress with the Inflation Recovery Act version of the New Green Deal. However, many states and large Utilities still remain on a foolish path toward Net-Zero Carbon. For example, Here are five articles on U.S. and South Carolina Energy Policies:
America needs to begin building new Dispatchable, affordable and proven reliable Bulk Power Generation as soon as possible. As I see it, the best source of the needed primary energy to satisfy the demand is America’s own treasure of coal reserves. Think about the needed capacity in terms of 32,000 MW per year for 25 years. That my friends is a heavy lift. The reference by Ken Haapala below quotes Sam Altman as stating we need 100 new 1GW power plants to be built each year, starting now. This is even more than my suggestion of 32 GW/year of new power generation.
As a country we must unite behind President Trump to get this done…Wake up Americans!
Yours very truly,
Dick Storm, October 22, 2025, updated Dec. 8, 2025
There are a number of states that are on a path to higher electricity bills and less reliability, including S.C. Why? Because the S.C. Governor and the Legislature are still stuck on Net Zero Carbon. I thought it might be informative to list 10 unpopular truths:
Hard Truths that Apply to S.C. as Well as All Other U.S. States
New nuclear plants will take decades to be built to replace existing coal and gas units
Electricity generation for Dispatchable Electricity Generation capacity takes years to build
Most of our electricity today comes from power plants that are more than 30 years old. S.C. examples: The Wateree coal plant began operation in 1970, Duke Energy’s Oconee nuclear plant, the largest in South Carolina, first unit started up in 1973, and the first Santee-Cooper Cross Unit began operation in 1984 and Winyah 1975.
The major production cost component of electricity generation for Thermal Power Plants is fuel
The proven lowest production cost of electricity is from coal, nuclear and gas
Coal prices have remained stable for decades
Gas prices are volatile and can fluctuate with market changes. Low gas prices into the future are not guaranteed
Wind, Solar, and Battery storage are higher-cost producers of Bulk Power. Forget the “Free Fuel Myth of Wind and Solar”. All states and countries that have taken the S.C. Net-Zero Carbon path now have high-cost electricity
South Carolina is on a similar primary energy path as Germany was fifteen years ago
It takes decades for the impact of energy policies to be felt by consumers and industry
Here is a presentation to the Beaufort Federation of Republican Men, which summarizes the S.C. path to higher cost electricity.
Bulk Power Supply and Demand Projections to 2052
The Supply/Demand Chart of Santee-Cooper is shown below. Note the plan to reduce coal power generation and replace it with gas, purchased power and variable renewables.
A Better Path: Build New Coal Plants
The low country of South Carolina has been well served by Santee-Cooper since 1934. Also known as South Carolina Public Service Authority. SCPSA is state owned and controlled.
Like TVA, Santee-Cooper began with hydroelectric generation and as with TVA, the electricity demand rapidly increased to loads far in excess of the available hydroelectric capacity. Thus coal plants were built and for most of the last 80 years most of the electricity generation has been from coal fuel. This continues to be the case. The screenshot below is the electricity generation the week of December 2, 2024. The primary energy provided for the power production was 77% coal fuel at this time and it will be needed again this coming winter.
To this day most of the Santee-Cooper installed power generation capacity is coal power plants. Here is a list of their generating assets. Over 60% are dispatchable and proven to be affordable coal power. Electricity costs in our region has been amongst the lowest in the U.S. for decades. Thanks to coal fuel. As the transition to more renewables and more backup natural gas is made, the cost of Bulk Power generation will increase as it has in Germany, the UK, Hawaii, CT, MA, NJ and other states that are ahead of S.C. in transitioning from coal to more renewable energy. The so called “Energy Transition” is the root cause of increasing electric rates. Hawaii as a poster child example of a transition to expensive “Green New Deal” renewables.
What About Industry?
About a third of S.C. electricity is used by industry. This is important for U.S. security, competitiveness and for the jobs industry provides. For the low country of S.C. there are at least two very energy intensive industries; Century Aluminum and Nucor Steel. Both of these industries use hundreds of Megawatts for steel and aluminum production. The main reason the plants were built in S.C. was because of reasonable cost electricity provided by Santee-Cooper. The Century Aluminum plant at full capacity will use over 400 MW and each Nucor plant about 175 MW. These two companies alone represent 24/7 Demand that is about a quarter of the huge Cross Generating Station’s capacity.
Can We Learn From the Experiences of Germany, the UK, California, Hawaii, Connecticut and New Jersey?
Each of these states & countries have been working toward a transition away from coal and toward renewables. In each case the electric rates have escalated to the point that they have caused industries to shut down and harmed the industrial capacity of the countries or states. Electricity is the LifeBlood of an economy. Ask a knowledgeable German citizen about the results of their energy transition.
The high German electricity rates have caused many very well run and established companies to shut down and/or relocate manufacturing into other countries. Three examples are BASF, Krupp Steel and VW
The Optimum Future Electricity Generation Capacity
A Balanced generation portfolio is optimum as a hedge against fuel cost escalation, security of generation and reliability of generation. In my experience and based on the well documented experiences of other states and countries, a balanced generation portfolio of no more than 20% renewables with the balance of generation from dispatchable sources such as nuclear, gas and coal, is best. Plenty of references are listed below (also the chart above) which show the results of over-reliance on windmills solar and battery backup or BESS (Battery Electricity Storage and Supply).
Conclusions
The main point I wish to make here is that Bulk Power, that is huge amounts of electricity generation from large power plants take years, even decades to replace or to use the word more common today, Transition. Most of the vital 24/7 electricity supply to S.C. is provided by aging power plants. Examples, Oconee about 53 years, Wateree about 55, Winyah 50 and Cross about 40 years old.
As reliable, affordable and dispatchable coal plants are shut down the electric production cost will increase and along with the rising production cost, eventually increased rates.
Building new coal plants as once was planned at the Pee Dee plant site, was and still is a good idea. So is building more nuclear plants but that takes time.
My suggestion for the S.C. Legislature is to remove the Net-Zero Carbon laws that are on the books and to provide ample funds for maintenance of the existing coal plants serving S.C. so well.
Electric generation capacity of Dominion and Santee-Cooper about 12,000 MW of Bulk Power Capacity: https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/hjyEG/5/ Duke Energy about 6600MW
The S.C. Legislature has laws on the books to exit coal power and depend on gas, nuclear, solar, wind and Battery backup systems (BESS). All of which are higher cost generation than coal. https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess126_2025-2026/bills/3309.htm
Wind, solar and BESS systems need to be backed up by Dispatchable generation. Usually that backup (and planned for S.C) is natural gas fueled generating plants. Therefore, one reason electricity costs are higher with solar and wind is because two to four times the generation capacity is needed over a coal or nuclear plant. Solar and wind are intermittent generators dependent on nature. Solar averages about 6 hours per day of generation.
We can call it a “Bridge Fuel” or just face the reality that it now takes over 100 Quadrillion BTUs of Primary Energy to Power America each year and that Primary Energy Demand will increase in the future. America is the Saudi Arabia of coal and we have the richest and highest quality coal on the planet. Also, an infrastructure to mine it and to transport it. This treasure should be utilized for the benefit of America and all of Humankind.
There are many reasons that new Base Load coal power plants should be under construction right now. In fact, they should have been under construction ten years ago!
Dick Storm’s Top Five Reasons to Build New coal Plants Now:
Coal power plants of sufficient Base Load Generation capacity could be built within ten years or less
Coal fuel cost is stable with less volatility than gas
America has more than sufficient coal reserves within our borders to fuel new coal power plants at a stable price
America’s Primary Energy Demand is likely to exceed 120 Quadrillion BTUs per year in the next decade. Coal will provide the additional productive capacity and it has been proven to do so by existing infrastructure
Choices of Primary Energy to Fuel the World
Global energy demand hit a record 592 exajoules (EJ) in 2024 — up 2%.
So, where did it come from? • Oil: 199 EJ (33.6%) – still the #1 source • Coal: 27.9% • Gas: 25.2%
Fossil Fuels are Still Important! Together, oil, coal, and gas supplied 86.7% of global energy. Despite the MSM reports, these three fuels still provide the primary energy we need and depend on.
🔥 Keeping the lights on 🥘 Cooking our food 🚗 Driving us to work ❄️ Powering our fridges and hospitals 🏠 Keeping us warm
Powers the manufacturing that in-turn, powers the Economy 👨🌾 Keeping us alive
Vaclav Smil shows that at least half of humanity is fed by nitrogen based fertilizers — made using natural gas via the Haber-Bosch process. That’s ~4 billion people who simply couldn’t survive without hydrocarbons. Add to that the energy needed for water, hospitals, heating, and transport, and the death toll from eliminating oil, coal, and gas overnight would not be in the millions — but in the billions.
Our much maligned Hydrocarbons don’t boast about this. They just work quietly to keep us alive. Each American uses right at 300 million BTUs each year. This is an average of just under 1 million BTU/day/person.
President Trump stated it correctly at the U.N. yesterday, “Climate Policies are a big Con Job” The only thing that the transition to solar and wind has done is to drive our electric bills through the roof and causing hardship and suffering amongst our most vulnerable.
🔌 Let’s not forget the reality of the sources of PRIMARY Energy that powers the world
Electricity Generation
About a third of the primary energy is used to generate electricity and the other 2/3’s for Transportation, Industrial, Commercial and Residential use.
America uses and has used right at 100 Quadrillion BTUs of Primary Energy annually. The total of 100 Quads is bound to grow in the future owing to natural electricity demand growth of a growing population, electricfication of some transportation, through reshoring of U.S. manufacturing and AI Data Center new electricity Demand. Note from the chart below the relatively constant total Primary Energy use. It is within 5% of a constant 100 Quadrillion BTUs per year ever since about the year 2000. In my opinion, it is reasonable to expect the total primary energy demand to increase by at least 20% over the next 20 years.
Visual Capitalist has another excellent illustration of projected U.S. Electricity growth to 2050. Please keep in mind, electricity uses between 33 and 40% of available primary energy. Therefore, considering all factors, including energy security, volatility of natural gas prices, exported LNG and other facts, coal provides the readily available primary energy to generate electricity in the needed Bulk Power quantities.
Electricity is important and so is transportation, residential heating, cooking and Industrial production from viable manufacturing plants.
Conclusion
The best solution to the self inflicted electricity generation crisis is to immediately begin building new coal plants. Over 150 new coal plants were planned in 2007, then President Obama launched his all out “War on Coal” and he was successful in stopping most of them from being constructed and even worse, created policies that resulted in the shutting down and demolishing over half of the existing coal power generation capacity.
The Life-Blood of America is electricity. I presented my thoughts on this in July at the Coal Institute summer meeting. I stand behind those comments and recommendations.
Thankfully we now have President Trump and he understands the relationship of reliable, affordable electricity generation. His speech to the U.N. yesterday was spot on. May God Bless and protect President Trump and his outstanding Cabinet.
Anti-American, pro-CCP energy policies are not limited to Blue states. We expect foolish energy policies from California, Hawaii, Massachussetts, CT, ME and NY but not so much in “Red States” like South Carolina. S.C. is one of the most Conservative states in the U.S. However the S.C. political leaders have drank the “Green Kool Aid” and continue to permit and depend on solar with battery backup to be promoted to replace the reliable and affordable coal generation in our state.
A chart of investment in renewables supports the comments of Dave Walsh. Over 91% of the new generation installed in the U.S. in 2024 was renewables. This is also corroborated on the Global Energy Monitor website.
Mark Lewis on LinkedIn has also posted a summary of the persistent building of tax subsidized, parasitic and high electricity rate driving solar and wind. Mark’s post is here. A screen shot of the ENVERUS chart is copied below. This is from Ian Nieboer Substack article. Thank you Ian. As can be seen, the subsidies for wind, solar and battery storage continue well past 2030. In my opinion and observations, the subsidies for wind and solar are the root cause of increasing electric rates nationwide and a trend toward reduced reliability as well.
Back to my Red state of S.C. SenatorTom Davis, Governor McMaster and the SC Legislature still have coal plant shutdowns planned for Santee-Cooper. Here is an excerpt of the Press Release on “All of the Above EnergyPolicy” by Senator Davis:
These coal plants have a stellar record of keeping electricity prices and reliability amongst the best in the world. Tom Davis’ Press Release after the Governor signed the SC Energy Bill implied: “We consider all forms of energy, renewables, gas and nuclear”. I emailed Davis to remind him that over 40% of Palmetto Electric’s Bulk Power is from coal and that it is the lowest cost fuel. Davis got right back to me and said, “We won’t shut coal plants down until a better source is found”….This is Not reassuring because, starving an operating plant of required maintenance $$ will simply cause it to become an unreliable and higher cost asset…then, predictably, the improperly maintained equipment wear and tear will lead to a self inflicted decay and unreliability. After the deterioration, this will lead to a then obvious decision to replace the coal plants with higher production cost gas plants. This happened at the once magnificent McIntosh Unit #3 at the City of Lakeland in Florida. I know because I worked many years for the City of Lakeland as a contractor and/or consultant, including the startup and tuning of McIntosh #3 and many maintenance efforts 1982-2012.
Reminder, the generation cost component to produce electricity, for a gas plant is about 90% fuel cost. Therefore, if the gas price doubles, so does the production cost of electricity. Let that sink in. The gas fueled RICE (Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines) will produce electricity at a cost that tracks natural gas prices.
Fast forward to next year and the U.S. exported LNG will likely increase domestic gas prices in the U.S. this winter and beyond. I support President Trump’s interest in exporting LNG but we should use more American coal for power generation here in the U.S. until new nuclear plants are built. In fact, more new coal plants should be built as well. I presented my thoughts and analysis of the importance of coal power at the Coal Institute in July. Coal is a more stable and economical fuel for Bulk Power generation.
Natural gas prices are not always low. Here is a 44 year history of gas prices compared to coal.
A minority of the folks in the U.S. population (Including Policymakers) understand the basics of energy and power generation. My estimate is less than 3%. Why? Utility generating plants became huge, highly automated and it only takes a crew of three operators to run a 600-1200 MW coal plant. Also, the 97% of the energy naive public has been bombarded with green indoctrination and lies about “Free solar and wind power”. Thus, the combination of high productivity of coal plants over the years has been done with a very small work force that has experience in power generation. Then, secondly, the successful demonization of coal by the MSM, Entertainment and well funded NGOs has led us to the point of a Self-Inflicted electricity generation crisis. ( Maybe not all Self Inflicted, some foreign actors were also involved)
Piling onto the madness of anti-American energy policies we have, Utility managers trained in accounting or law that have teamed up with similarly low Energy IQ politicians to create harmful, anti-American, Net-Zero Carbon Policies…These are so called “Energy Policies”. Why and how can these insane policies be put into place? Because the policy makers simply do not understand basic power generation fundamentals. Much of the western world has been following the same destructive Net-Zero Carbon path. Five examples are the UK, Germany, Spain, Australia and Denmark. They all have high power costs that are killing their once productive Industrial base. My adopted state of S.C. seems to be right there with the UK and Germany with regard to foolish “Green Energy Policies”.
Conclusions
Much of the Free Western World has been making the same mistakes on following a path to Net-Zero Carbon
It is my opinion that the path to Net-Zero Carbon was to reduce the productive capacity of the west and increase the dependence on manufactured products from China. Net-Zero Carbon policies are Not based on sound energy policies or for protection of the environment. At best they are to promote government control of our lives. At worst they are to weaken the western free world and therefore by default, increase the world influence of China.
Thankfully we have President Trump and Chris Wright to frame U.S. Energy Policy. However, the purpose of this article is to point out the fact that many states remain on paths to destroy reasonable cost, reliable electric power generation that supports industrial production and economic prosperity…
GRIDWATCH Australia Thank you Rafe Champion! “AT 6.30 PM eastern time THE WIND WAS CONTRIBUTING 13% OF DEMAND IN THE EAST AND 2.5% IN THE WEST OH DEAR!!” https://www.nem-watch.info/widgets/RenewEconomy/
About three decades ago I became curious of those people and organizations that seemed to work in earnest against the best interests of the U.S.A. My interest began with EPA “Violations of New Source Review” How did they affect me? It was directly. Myself and our team were consulting and providing performance improving modifications (“modifications” was a dirty word with the EPA when NSR is considered) with numerous electric Utilities to improve capacity, fuel flexibility, heat-Rate (efficiency improvement) and to reduce emissions. What reward did we get for improving efficiency, reducing the cost of power generation and reducing emissions? The plant owners were fined and in some cases the plants were prematurely retired and shut down. As for my company, we just lost some business and moved on to the next opportunity. But….I remember at the time…wondering why the EPA rules that already seemed anti-American became even more restrictive and seemed to be headed toward outlawing coal for power generation? Ultimately EPA Rules leading to the “Self-Sabotaging” of our reliable power generation. That was a time when about 50% of America’s electricity was generated from coal fuel and the U.S. enjoyed amongst the lowest cost electricity in the world, the Grid was reliable and affordable. Then the Obama Administration boldly did move to literally demonize and outlaw new coal power generation plants with the “EPA Endangerment Finding” in 2010.
A reminder, Obama and his EPA created the EV Mandate in 2012. Then the escalated “War on Coal”.
Fast-forward to 2025 and now facts are coming out that perhaps the “Self-Sabotaging” of our electric grid was not driven by policies to clean the air and water. Perhaps a more sinister motivation? Here are twenty references that implicate certain U.S. politicians and China’s influence. The EPA Rules went beyond clean air and water and in my opinion, were anti-American.
The SWAMP is comprised of many nefarious actors, both foreign and domestic. Some are as innocent looking as TIME Magazine and Dan Rather on CBS News. Thank you Chris Martz, Tony Heller, James Woods, Krudkrew147, and John Stossel for these reminders of the greatest scientific hoax in history. The misinformation on science, demonization of coal and hydrocarbon fuels has literally crippled the industrial production of western civilization and helped to transfer manufacturing and the wealth it provides to China. Here are some of the domestic sources of the mischievous Climate propaganda.
A CBS News report by Dan Rather warns that if we don’t stop digging up ancient carbon and burning it, 25% of Florida will be underwater.
Posted on “X” by Krudkrew147 Captures the true facts in one meme. Was it a hoax or successful Propaganda by the CCP?
History of Energy Foundation China, according to Influence Watch
The enemies of common sense energy policies are not only foreigners. Note the American NGO’s listed in Influence Watch. To me, this is troubling, to see respected NGOs and American businesses that are aiding and abetting the CCP.
The Energy Foundation was founded in 1991 when three foundations – the MacArthur Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Pew Charitable Trusts – recruited recent Stanford University graduates Hal Harvey, Tom Strand, and Eric Heitz to start an environmental initiative. Energy Foundation China was launched in 1999 with support from the Hewlett and Packard foundations. In 1999, the Packard Foundation helped to establish Energy Foundation China, with offices in Beijing. In 2020, Energy Foundation China separated from the Energy Foundation, whilst retaining the legacy EIN number.
Like others knowledgeable in power generation, I thought, these are actions to deliberately weaken America. They could not be done better by our country’s mortal enemies if they were in charge of the EPA themselves. So, that is where I am coming from. The purpose of this article is to review the history of Applied Political Science 1990-2023 enemies within the U.S. Some are foreign and some are domestic.
Here are previous articles that I wrote on Influencers of U.S. Environmental Policies that literally caused the Self Sabotaging of our power generation infrastructure.
The past fifteen years of anti conventional energy policies will be difficult to overcome. I applaud President Trump and his outstanding Cabinet members for their efforts to correct past anti-American environmental and energy polices. However, I fear that we have gone a bit past the tipping point of NOT building enough new generation capacity to replace that which has been shut down and in most cases, destroyed. The about 125,000 MW of coal power generation shut down since 2010 cannot be replaced by new coal or nuclear plants of similar capacity by 2030 due to supply-chain limitations. Obama, Pelosi, Biden and the Democrats have weakened our electric power generation infrastructure. Why do they seem to have a stronger allegiance to China than to the U.S.A.?
My hope and prayer is that the American people will wake up and force the Democrat politicians to begin to support Pro-American energy and environmental policies. Based on what I have observed over the past 15 years, this will be difficult for many NGOs, wealthy individuals, politicians and Bureaucrats to support restoring American Industrial productivity, as we had before Obama’s Presidency. Rebuilding the supply-chain of talent, manufacturing capacity and the “American Can Do” attitude will be hard unless the half of our country stuck on resisting Trump wakes up and supports America First.
Respectfully and very truly yours,
Dick Storm, August 7, 2025
83 References for further background (updated August. 8, 2025)
Chinese Companies listed on U.S. Stock Exchanges: As of March 7, 2025, there were 286 Chinese companies listed on these U.S. exchanges with a total market capitalization of $1.1 trillion. That valuation increased by $250 billion from the start of 2024, when this table tracked just 265 Chinese companies listed on U.S. exchanges with a total market capitalization of $848 billion. Since January 2024, 48 Chinese companies have listed on the three U.S. exchanges, raising $2.1 billion in combined initial public offerings (IPOs). https://www.uscc.gov/research/chinese-companies-listed-major-us-stock-exchanges
Sheldon Whitehouse’s new book where he will claim the opposition party does what he and his party have done very effectively, for decades: “The Scheme, where He accuses Republicans of using Dark Money”, when in fact, the Democrats do it much more: https://thenewpress.com/books/scheme
For most of the U.S. during high electricity demand periods, natural gas, coal and nuclear provide the Primary energy to provide over 75% of America’s electricity. Here is an example from July 29, 2025 during a peak load of about 745,000 MW for the lower 48 states.
The primary energy provided by gas, coal and nuclear on this day is 77%. This is for 48 states. MISO is even more dependent on gas, nuclear and coal. Here is MISO on the afternoon of July 29th. Over 79% gas, nuclear and coal. Coal was providing a vital 32.9% of total generation.
Another 250,000 MW of Bulk Power Required for 2030 perhaps 800,000 MW More by 2050
In my opinion, building 14 new large nuclear plants each year till 2050 is pure fantasy. So is building 8000 new SMRs, even though I think they are a good idea.
Natural gas plants are the easy route for Utilities to take. However, in my opinion, we have too much dependence on pipeline provided gas supply now. Also, the cost component of fuel gas for electric power production from gas turbines is about 90%. Therefore electricity production costs will nearly double if gas prices double. A Balanced Generation Portfolio is best. Here is my thoughts on a Balanced Generation Portfolio in Dick Storm’s version of a “Perfect World” of Bulk Power Supply.
The Importance of Coal Power
There are many supporters of coal power. However, we are in fact out-numbered and outshouted by many organizations that have perpetrated the Self-Sabotaging of the Life-Blood of America. I have written before on these SWAMP organizations and some links are included below for reference.
Suffice it to say, coal remains important to power America. As shown above in actual generation during this summer. Winter will prove that coal is even more important. Winter Storm Uri in 2021 showed (at least to me) the harm that premature shutting down of coal plants in Texas caused.
Increased Generation Capacity of 250,000 MW by 2030
If the U.S. electricity demand increases by 250,000 MW by 2030 and new gas turbine plants supply half of this, I suggest that the other 125,000 MW come from new coal plants. How many will it take? A lot. Here below is the Cross Generating Station of Santee-Cooper. This plant has a capacity of about 2350 MW. It would take over 50 new plants like Cross to produce 125,000 MW. Possible by 2030, probably not due to supply-chain weaknesses. However, we should start now!
Previously Published Thoughts Related to the Need for New Coal Plants in the U.S.
My comments to the American public and elected officials. It is time that you all wake up and do a little research into the primary energy that our country depends on. If competing with China is important to you, think about the advantages of using the God given treasure of energy that America has within our borders.
President Trump’s acknowledgement of the importance of energy at the Pittsburgh Energy and AI Summit is appreciated. My suggestion to Governor Shapiro and state Legislators in the Great State of Pennsylvania is: Remove the Regulatory Obstacles that stand in the way of building new coal plants. Just a day before President Trump’s Summit, I presented my analysis of the need for new coal plants at the Coal Institute. Not only the need for new coal plants, but also the fact that the primary energy of coal is the only source to use for major Bulk Power generation, 24/7, affordable, Dispatchable, storable and proven, before 2035.
Coal remains an important source of primary energy. If the laws of Physics, Common-Sense and Economic sanity prevailed, America would be building at least a hundred fifty green field or updated design HELE coal plants to serve Pennsylvania and the growing U.S. Demand for electricity across all 50 states. At the end of my presentation to the coal Institute I included sobering facts and data on the use of coal by China. For the U.S. to win the competition with China for AI dominance and to reshore manufacturing to the U.S., more new plants delivering reliable, affordable, Dispatchable coal power are needed.
There is One Source of Primary Energy that Can Provide Fuel for the Extreme Growth of Electricity Demand in the next Ten Years, Coal!
The growing electricity Demand will be difficult to generate without significant additions of new Dispatchable generation. Natural gas is the predominant fuel of choice, the easy path for Utilities to add generation. However, there are limitations to continued growth of gas generation to let’s say 100,000 MW or more by 2032. Meanwhile, electricity Demand is soaring at over 2% per year and by 2032 the increased peak demand is likely to be in the magnitude of 250,000 MW more.
There is One Fuel that Can Generate the New Power Demand
Natural gas is already providing about 43% of U.S. power generation, the supply-chain for new gas plants is limited and the risk of a single point of failure of “just in time” gas supply, doesn’t seem prudent to me. Nuclear is highly regarded and hoped for. I support more new nuclear generation. However, green field nuclear capacity additions in the magnitude of 250,000 MW will take decades to accomplish. Keep in mind the existing nuclear fleet which generates about 18% of America’s electricity now is from old nuclear plants most of which are over 40 years old. It took about 30 years to build the existing 97,000 MW of nuclear generation capacity. The Georgia Power Plant Vogtle additions of units 3 & 4 about 2,200 MW took ten years to design and construct.
Solar capacity in this magnitude is not practical and should not be attempted due to the enormous land use required. The 800,00 MW expected to be needed by 2050 would require solar farms about the size of 1 1/2 states the size of South Carolina. So, solar has its limitations.
Planned Solar Generation in PJM
Chris Moran of PJM presented an excellent presentation to describe the operations of PJM and how the PJM Interconnection functions. A very informative and well prepared presentation. Near the end of Chris’s presentation he showed the planned new generation for the PJM territory. Here is a screen shot of one of the slides. Yes, 63% Solar.
Conclusions:
It is Impossible for Solar and Wind to meet the Demand for new electricity in Pennsylvania to satisfy the needs of new AI growth and electricity for the return of manufacturing to the U.S.
Natural Gas remains important, but PJM and most of America is already dependent on too much natural gas for Base Load generation
The Supply-Chain of equipment to build efficient gas turbine, combined cycle plants is already stretched to meet the surging Demand
New nuclear plants will take at least a decade to provide significant new Greenfield Bulk Power generation in the range of 10,000-20,000 MW’s of new capacity
Coal plants can be built in less than ten years
Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Wyoming, Illinois, Texas and other states have enormous reserves of high quality American Coal. We should use this Domestic Treasure of Primary Energy
It is my hope that Chris Wright and President Trump read this message. I strongly stand behind the talk I presented at the Coal Institute, this blog post and others that support coal power generation.
Electricity has been heralded as the Life-Blood of our economy. Little has been written on the fact that electricity is secondary energy and that a form of primary energy is needed to generate electricity. America has required right at 100 Quadrillion BTUs of Primary energy for the last twenty five years to power our economy, industrial production and our freedom of transportation. This is. +/- about 7 Quads. In this article I will show why coal must and should be included in the primary energy mix to provide up to about 20% of America’s primary energy for at least the next twenty years.
Electricity generation uses about a third of the total primary energy consumed in the U.S. and Primary energy comes from five main sources:
Petroleum
Natural gas
Coal
Nuclear
Renewables
The primary energy produced and consumed by the U.S. is reported by the U.S. DOE Energy Information Administration (EIA). To arrive at a standard reporting format, the primary energy is reported in BTUs (British Thermal Units). Here is the chart of primary energy use for the year 2023.
Conventional forms of energy: Petroleum, Natural Gas, Nuclear and Coal provide over 90% of the energy that is the Life-Blood of America! Solar and wind after decades of subsidies are minor contributions to the overall supply of primary energy at about 3%. Chris Wright in testimony before Congress correctly referred to wind and solar as “Parasites”. Wind and solar consume billions of investment dollars for very little benefit to our country.
How Much Energy in BTUs is Used by Each Citizen?
The chart above shows 93.6 Quadrillion BTUs of total primary energy used during 2023. If the total 93.6 Quads is divided by 340 million citizens then the per capita energy use comes out to being about 280 million BTUs per person/per year. For discussion purposes, let’s round that up to 300 million BTUs. Remember, this is total primary energy and about a third of it is used to generate electricity. The other 2/3’s is used for transportation, heating, cooking, commercial, industrial production and other residential uses.
How is Primary Energy Used?
Here is a chart of the five sectors of Primary energy use, since 1950. The five sectors being: Electricity generation, Transportation, Industrial, Residential and Commercial.
The main point of this essay is to point out that it takes a certain amount of Primary Energy to power our lives. That amount is about 100 Quads today and is projected to grow as AI and the transition to more electrification of transportation and reshoring of American manufacturing is achieved.
There are only four main sources of massive amounts of primary energy to satisfy this Demand. These are petroleum, natural gas, coal and nuclear. The expected contributions of solar and wind are almost insignificant when considered in the mix of Primary Energy.
The U.S. total primary energy consumption has remained relatively constant at about 100 Quads since the year 2000. The previous article digs into more detail of the 100 Quadrillion BTUs required to power the U.S.
Do you remember when our government leaders and many organizations were cheering to “Electrify Everything“? Perhaps this is a good time to discuss “Primary Energy”. The four sources discussed above are the viable choices at our disposal. The pro-rating energy use of each American citizen is about 315 million BTUs per year. This totals about 100 Quadrillion BTUs. If our economy is to grow, our freedom of travel maintained and our food production, comforts and conveniences kept the same, let’s say we will likely continue to require 100 Quadrillion BTUs plus the growth of 1.7-2% per year for AI, population growth and reshoring manufacturing.
Growth of 2% per year doesn’t seem like much does it? Well, let’s look at it another way. Two percent growth will result in the doubling of electricity in about 35 years. There are forecasting experts that have predicted 78% electricity Demand growth by 2050. So the 2% per year and forecasts are pretty close. Let’s stick to electricity generation which uses about a third of the total primary energy consumed.
According to American Public Power, “electricity demand in the United States will increase 2% annually and 50% by 2050, according to a new study conducted by PA Consulting and released by the National Electrical Manufacturers Association.”
“Driven by record growth in data centers and e-mobility, the study highlights innovative technology and policy solutions to maintain a reliable and affordable energy system through this new age of demand growth,” NEMA said.
“The study, “A Reliable Grid for an Electric Future,” predicts that growth in electricity demand in the United States will be driven by a 300% rise in energy consumption by data centers and a 9,000% increase in energy consumption required for e-mobility and charging, with overall electricity projected to grow from 21% of final energy use to 32% by 2050.”
“Additionally, consumption changes will vary by U.S. region and will vary across markets over time, driven primarily by data centers in the next decade and EVs in the longer term”.
“The Mid-Atlantic and Texas will see the largest data center electricity demand growth through 2035, and the Northeast and West will experience the largest electricity demand growth from EVs between 2035 through 2050.”
A Case for New Coal Plants
Previous articles by myself and others have discussed electricity growth and the need to build new coal, nuclear and natural gas power plants. Here are four:
The purpose of this essay is to emphasize the importance of using coal fuel and some reasons why I believe this to be true. The long story shortened is this:
Natural gas already dominates electricity generation and the supply-chain of new gas turbines is stretched into four or five year lead times. Another concern that I have is, energy security. Do we really want nearly 50% of our electricity generation fuel to be delivered just in time by pipelines? Coal plants have the inherent advantage of on-site energy storage of months of fuel. The same for nuclear plants which can literally store years of fuel on site. Nuclear is clean, proven and an outstanding form of power generation. In reality, we don’t need 50 or a hundred Megawatts of new generation. We need hundreds of thousands of Megawatts of new reliable, 24/7, dispatchable electricity generation. Frankly, if the 102,000 MW of coal plants that were shut down since 2010 were replaced with new ones, it would be a huge step forward! Destroying over 100,000 MW of reliable coal generation without replacing it in kind was wrong and the loss has weakened America. The planned self-inflicted energy crisis continues. Maybe not thanks to President Trump. But here is what was planned before Trump’s EO’s.
The madness of the U.S. Self-Inflicted Clean Energy Crisis continues. According to EIA and other respected news services, the U.S. Utilities plan to shut down more coal plants in the near future.
Massive new nuclear generation can be expected given ten or twenty years to rebuild the supply chain. It took about thirty years, 1956-1986 to build the first 100,000 MW of U.S. nuclear plant generating capacity. Given consistent government policies and regulations, we should be able to do it again.
More Electricity Generation is Needed, Lots More!
The answer? Build new coal plants. Let me go back to the total primary energy flows chart at the top. America runs on about 100 Quadrillion BTUs of thermal energy each year. This has been constant within +/- 10 Quads for over twenty years.
The future, if America is to remain strong, will require more Primary energy. Let’s say it will take ten more Quads. Where else can ten Quads of energy be found each year over the next five years? I would like to point out that in 2009 America used 21.8 Quads of coal.
In 2024 the coal portion of the total Primary energy had dropped to about 8 Quads. Therefore, it is proven that America, given the right policies and investments can produce at least 21.8 Quads of coal energy/year. How do I know that, easy, we did it as recent at 2009. The slide below is from my presentation to the ASME Annual meeting in Dallas, 2011.
The world is using more coal than ever. The chart below is from JoNova presentation on her blog.
Conclusions
Electricity growth is the highest it has been in decades and about 125,000 MW of new Dispatchable electricity generation is needed by 2030 and about 600,000 MW more by 2050
Gas Turbines power about 45% of America’s electricity generation now and it is mostly provided by just in time pipeline supply. National security requires more on site energy storage. Long term energy storage is provided naturally by Coal plants
Gas turbine additions are limited due to choke points in the supply-chain
New nuclear plants are also needed. However, building the needed 125,000 MW of new capacity will take decades. It took about 30 years to build the first 100,000 MW of U.S. nuclear generation capacity
A Balanced electricity generation portfolio is preferred for reliability, affordability and security. The major generation sources of over 70% of the generation should be nuclear, gas and coal power.
Coal power plants have proven to be the lowest cost producers of electricity in the U.S. Where coal plants have been shutdown, such as CT, MA, CA and Hawaii the electricity costs are the highest in America. Where coal plants continue to operate such as UT, NE, MO, WVA the electricity prices are the lowest
The Coal Power Infrastructure is still in tact. Mines, RR’s etc. and production can be doubled in the short term
Coal energy storage on site is an advantage for power security
The U.S. power equipment manufacturing supply chain was capable of producing numerous coal plants as recent as 2013. This supply chain can and should be revitalized
The rest of the world is increasing coal use for electricity generation. As outlined by Vijay Jayaraj article, GEMS and IEA reports. So should America be building new coal plants. What other fuel can satisfy the growing Demand for Primary Energy in the near future?
Power for the U.S.A. 