I love honest people. Engaging in straightforward discussions and even arguments is one of my favorite pastimes. This morning, I opened up my copy of Chesapeake Energy’s annual report and read the following clear statement of objectives:
Some of the great public debates of the next 10 years will focus on how we should meet America’s growing need for more electricity. Presently, coal meets 52% of our electricity needs, nuclear 21%, natural gas 21% and hydro, wind and other renewables about 6%. It is imperative for our company and industry that natural gas be seen as the preferred solution (emphasis added) to meeting the twin challenges of generating more electricity in the years ahead while at the same time reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Chesapeake Energy demonstrated part of how it intended to meet that objective during the recent discussions in Texas about TXU’s plans to build new coal fired generation right in the heart of Chesapeake’s primary production areas – the US mid-continent. During that discussion, Chesapeake Energy set up a group called the Clean Sky Coalition and ran a series of TV ads with the theme of “Face it, Coal is Dirty”. (See, for example, a story by John J. Fialka in the April 27, 2007 issue of the Wall Street Journal titled Coalition Ends Ad Campaign Bashing Coal)
The letter from the Chairman in the annual report provides a good look at what I believe is a strong strategy for making a good profit. There is, after all, a reason why I receive the annual report – I have been an investor in the company for quite a number of years. However, I do think it is important for my pro-nuclear colleagues to enter the battle with open eyes. Here is an important part of the stated strategy:
Today we see policymakers promoting alternative fuels such as wind, solar, biofuels, and nuclear. These are all legitimate alternatives (though some much less so than others), yet none can offer energy in great abundance at reasonable price anytime soon. On the other hand, burning natural gas instead of gasoline, diesel or coal reduces greenhouse gas emissions by approximately 50%. We believe the evidence clearly demonstrates that natural gas is by far the most practical solution to the problem – it is abundant, affordable, reliable, clean burning and domestically produced.
To spread the word about the positive attributes of natural gas, Chesapeake has recently helped establish a foundation based in Washington, D. C., called the American Clean Skies Foundation (www.americancleanskies.com). This foundation will become a leading voice in the debate about how to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and avoid abrupt climate change. The foundation will encourage conservation of all types of energy, but will primarily advocate the increased use of natural gas in the U. S. and around the world.
Read that last sentence carefully again and see if you see the contradiction.
Rod Adams is Managing Partner of Nucleation Capital, a venture fund that invests in advanced nuclear, which provides affordable access to this clean energy sector to pronuclear and impact investors. Rod, a former submarine Engineer Officer and founder of Adams Atomic Engines, Inc., which was one of the earliest advanced nuclear ventures, is an atomic energy expert with small nuclear plant operating and design experience. He has engaged in technical, strategic, political, historic and financial analysis of the nuclear industry, its technology, regulation, and policies for several decades through Atomic Insights, both as its primary blogger and as host of The Atomic Show Podcast. Please click here to subscribe to the Atomic Show RSS feed. To join Rod's pronuclear network and receive his occasional newsletter, click here.
Jim Conca has published a couple of recent posts on Forbes.com about the premature closure of nuclear power plants in the United States. One titled Are California’s Carbon Goals Kaput? focuses on some of the environmental aspects of the San Onofre debacle; the other, titled Closing Vermont Nuclear Bad Business for Everyone focuses on the…
Proving the Principle provides some wonderful and inspiring stories about the days when the United States had a place where atomic tinkerers could explore new ideas and test those ideas with real reactors and real materials. It also provides some insights about the economically and politically motivated reasons that a place with those characteristics no…
A ‘smoking gun’ article is one that reveals a direct connection between a fossil fuel or alternative energy system promoter and a strongly antinuclear attitude. One of my guiding theories about energy is that a great deal of the discussion about safety, cost, and waste disposal is really a cover for a normal business activity…
I have recently been introduced to a fascinating energy industry information source called European Energy Review. It is useful to find new perspectives on a topic as broad and as important as the large and lucrative energy supply business. The situation in Europe has always been substantially different from that in the US, because it…
A story titled GOP House candidate Bill Flores backtracks on loans for nuclear power plants caught my eye this morning. It tells the story of Bill Flores, who is running for congress in the Texas district that includes the Comanche Peak nuclear power station. Luminant, the current station owner, has been working for a number…
A couple of days ago, I wrote about my discovery that Robert O. Anderson, a long time leader in the global petroleum business, had provided the seed money that David Brower used to fund Friends of the Earth, an organization that has been fighting against nuclear energy for more than 40 years. I pointed out…