Energy consumption can be divided into two major sectors – electricity generation to power our homes, offices, factories and, in the future, our automobiles and transportation energy for our cars, trucks, airplanes and most ships.

In electricity generation, there are many options to improve our generation infrastructure. Nuclear energy is an obvious, safe alternative, which the United States needs to develop much more fully; previously, we led the world in nuclear generation. Now, while our collection of 104 reactors in use remains static, there are 331 reactors supplying power in 29 other countries around the world. New generations of reactors are being phased in elsewhere; we must avail ourselves of this safe and low-cost energy technology. California needs to eliminate unnecessary litigation and regulations that block development of nuclear energy facilities and drive up their cost. American power companies have submitted applications to build some 26 new reactors in the United States; our country needs to see these projects to completion.

Wind systems are now close to providing electricity at near grid parity in pricing. Solar systems for both concentrated applications in desert regions and rooftop usage in urban areas are also becoming more competitive as entrepreneurs and investors develop ever more cost-effective solutions. Projections that wind, solar, geothermal and even wave/tidal solutions will vie with power generation from coal are encouraging. These alternative energy resources should also be supported in California’s research universities.

Government should become an early adopter of the new renewable-generation technologies now being brought to market. Governmental purchasing power would stimulate demand in these fledgling American industries and help reduce their cost as manufacturing volume increases.

Oil dominates the transportation energy sector; over the last decade, oil imports have peaked (in 2005) and biofuels have grown, now accounting for over 8% of gasoline consumption and some part of diesel usage. California should support research at its universities in the science of increasing our biofuel output and increasing the transition of our transportation fleet to biofuel and, ultimately, electricity-powered vehicles where energy efficiency is optimized. (Just touch an automobile engine and then an electric motor to realize how much wasted heat energy is consumed in internal combustion engines!)

UPDATE: CALIFORNIA’S ENERGY POLICY

California depends critically on energy for our homes, businesses, and transportation, along with a commitment to a healthy environment and successful adaptation to climate change. These needs require balanced policies based on facts and sensible trade-offs.

California needs reliable delivery of electrical energy, day or night, sunny or cloudy, windy or not. California’s portfolio of electricity generation should develop toward an optimized balance of:

• A declining percentage of energy produced using fossil-based fuels

• Existing and expanded hydroelectric power

• Natural gas power plants

• Solar photovoltaic

• Wind turbines

• Geothermal production, and

• Safe nuclear power.

Hydroelectric power provides 15% of California’s electrical energy. Capital costs have already been paid. Hydro produces no greenhouse gases. Our planning for additional water storage in California should include for purposes of electricity generation.

Natural gas produces 38% of California’s electricity, and offers power on demand 24/7, with only modest greenhouse emissions.

Solar and wind account for 25% of California’s electrical energy and is growing. However, their power generation is intermittent, depending on sunny and windy days, requiring California to purchase enormous batteries.

Nuclear power has undergone extensive improvements in safety and cost. Many European countries obtain a large portion of their electricity from nuclear power, including France at 70%. It is time for California to expand safe nuclear power, adding to the existing 11% of its electricity California already receives from it.

Nuclear power has been supported by the past six U.S. presidents (both parties), including President Biden’s Administration that calls for “advanced nuclear reactors, that are smaller, safer, and more efficient at half the construction cost of today’s reactors.” Spent fuel is stored at various storage sites. A permanent underground storage location in Nevada makes the most sense geologically as the least seismically active location in the United States. This solution, however, was held up for years by Senator Harry Reid, when he was leader of the Senate Democrats.

California should support research into efficient batteries to store the electrical energy. However, the supply chains for lithium and other critical minerals are dominated by China, which has also purchased lithium mines worldwide. The U.S. must break this dependence on China by subsidizing mining, refining, and transport of critical minerals.

Similarly, energy independence from the Middle East oil producers is vital to national security.

Hydroelectric, solar, wind, and nuclear energy generate no greenhouse gases; but natural gas does. A carbon tax is a more efficient way of reducing carbon emissions than an arbitrary cap set by state government, even if the latter allows trading of carbon emission certificates.

While being a leader comes naturally to California, we must be realistic in noting that California’s contribution to greenhouse gas emission is less than 1.5% of the worldwide total. If California miraculously became carbon-neutral (at costs of trillions of dollars), greenhouse gas emission globally would continue at 98.5% of the current emission.

Climate policy must include “adaptation”, such as building sea walls, helping farmers and ranchers cope, building more reservoirs to account for reduced Sierra snow-pack, and bolstering forest management and public utilities’ efficiency improvements.

California can optimize its energy portfolio by gaining independence of foreign resources, reducing over-regulation, and establishing policy trade-offs that are common sense.