Latest news with #RogerPielke
CBS News
08-05-2025
- Business
- CBS News
NOAA ending its "billion-dollar disasters" database
NOAA announced Thursday that it is decommissioning several databases, including its widely reported annual compilation of billion-dollar weather and climate disasters. The announcement was made on NOAA's website under "notice of change," which said it would no longer be updated due to "evolving priorities, statutory mandates, and staffing changes." The move was first reported by CNN. The database is a popular tool, both for the government as well as the insurance industry, and media organizations often use it for reporting on the economic costs of extreme weather. According to a current NOAA employee, who spoke on condition of anonymity out of fear of losing their job, part of the reason the billion-dollar database is being decommissioned is because it is "not core" to NOAA's mission, since its focus is on economics and an analysis of various datasets. Additionally, the lead researcher of the database resigned last month by taking a separation incentive package. More than 2,200 NOAA employees have been let go under the Trump administration, and the White House budget proposal would cut NOAA's funding by 30%. According to NOAA's database, 2024 saw 27 extreme weather or climate-related disasters with damage of at least $1 billion each. NOAA data/CBS News Criticism had been mounting against the billion-dollar database over the years, driven by Roger Pielke Jr., a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and faculty at the University of Colorado-Boulder. Pielke argued it needs better metadata, review and documentation. He published a paper in the journal Nature last year about the database, saying it failed to meet NOAA's "criteria of procedure and substance" based on the agency's "information quality and scientific integrity policies." In a phone interview with CBS News, Pielke said, "I'm a huge fan of NOAA and the National Weather Service, they play a huge public service role, and I'm not happy with the sledgehammer that is being taken to the agency." He said having climatologists in charge of the data was problematic and resulted in some quality-control issues that could be addressed by proper economists. He also said the current dataset isn't fixable at NOAA, but that it would be very important for another federal agency to take disaster losses seriously and track the data. Several members of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology sent a letter to then-NOAA Administrator Dr. Rick Spinrad last fall sharing concerns that the database was misleading. "The lack of updated, comprehensive data in these models raises considerable concern given that these reports have been cited by both Congress and the President as the justification for different federal government actions concerning climate change," they wrote, repeatedly citing Pielke's research in the letter. Spinrad says he doesn't necessarily disagree with Pielke's arguments, but believes it should be a collaboration between an office like the Bureau of Economic Analysis and NOAA. "The fact of the matter is a large component of billion-dollar losses are based on environmental observations," he told CBS News in a phone interview. "How do you separate out the differences between a liquid natural gas facility exploding and a tornado hitting a town? ... What constitutes the physical delineations that cause a problem? You need an environmental component and I'd feel better with a NOAA scientist doing that in conjunction with an economist." According to Spinrad, critics have also taken issue with how much of the damage to attribute to climate change as compared to other factors such as development and population growth in urban areas. Spinrad said he previously suggested that the report should be broken into two parts: the data and the interpretation of the causes. Both Pielke and Spinrad agree that good data needs to be collected and published. "Yanking down the database obfuscates the discussion on natural disasters, and for this to go away and not be part of the dialogue is a big problem. If you talk to the reinsurance industry and retail, so many sectors rely on this database," Spinrad said. contributed to this report.
Forbes
08-04-2025
- Business
- Forbes
Why Aren't Gas Industry Giants Jumping On AI Power?
. So why is the oil and gas industry interested in providing electrical power that can be generated by gas turbines? First, learned industry people are predicting peak oil around 2030; oil declines after this. Second, natural gas is likely to grow, particularly LNG (liquified naturel gas). But there are headwinds: uncertainties in LNG due to such long-term investments, and solar/storage batteries are now cheaper than new-build gas power plants. Third, in their Global Energy Review 2025, IEA (the International Energy Agency) shows that almost all regions of the world saw an acceleration in the rate of electricity consumption growth in 2024 compared with the annual average from 2012 to 2022. Globally, electricity consumption increased by 1,080 TWh (TerraWatt hours), nearly twice the average of the previous ten years. This was caused by record global heat and cool air conditioning, rising industry consumption, electrification of transport, and growth of data centers and AI (artificial intelligence). The IEA report has an eye-popping interpretation by Roger Pielke. A global increase of 1,080 TWh in 2024 is the equivalent of bringing online 135 new nuclear reactors in 2024. This sudden growth of electrical power is clearly a big deal because it opens doors for new investment in natural gas, solar and batteries, geothermal, and nuclear technologies. Hence the prospect of a Big-Gas jump on AI power. But this is the global picture, what about the U.S. situation? Projected electricity demand in U.S. through 2040. In the U.S., one estimate is that 5,000 new data centers will be needed to feed the new AI industry. One data center uses an amount of power equal to that used in 10,000 houses. By 2040, in a milestone report by S&P Global, to meet U.S. electrical needs would require both renewables plus battery storage and gas-fired energy: an extra 940 GW (GigaWatt) of the former, and about 80 GW of the latter. 'Adding above 900 GW to the supply mix through 2040, renewables and batteries are by far the main source of supply … on a nameplate basis given their availability, low-cost, preference from consumers, and policy support.' Altogether, about 1,000 GW of extra power (940 GW + 80 GW) by 2040 converts to 81.9 bcfd (billion cubic feet per day) of gas wells. For comparison, the U.S. currently produces ~100 bcfd of natural gas, so 81.9 bcfd would be a huge jump, akin to the industry's enormous present-day supply of U.S. gas. Although there are reasons why it's not feasible to pull this off, a potential Big-Gas jump on AI power has got to be stirring attention. The big data tech firms Microsoft, Google, Meta, Amazon, initially favored carbon-free sources of electricity for their data centers. When AI appeared, some firms even looked to uncommercial startup sources such as geothermal and small nuclear reactors (SMRs). But the new AI power requirements are immense, and now these digital companies are embracing fossil natural gas. Texas is a case in point. Texas has the second largest number of data centers, after Virginia, partly because the cost of business is low. One observer speculated 56 GW of electrical power would be needed in Texas. The S&P Global study estimated the U.S. would need 1,000 GW of extra power by 2040: 940 GW of renewable/batteries and 80 GW of gas-fired power. While in the U.S. renewables like SoWiBess (solar, wind, and batteries for storage) are continuing to grow, the gas side of the equation has serious headwinds, as described below. Still, some companies have been proactive. Engine No. 1, famous for its successful clash with ExxonMobil in 2021 to elect new candidates to the board, has booked gas turbines from GE Vernova, a manufacturer. This means any other buyer will have to wait until 2028. Engine No. 1 has joined with developer Crusoe in a project near Abilene, Texas, which is rumored to be a part of the $500 billion Stargate enterprise supported by Trump. The Houston Chronicle also reported that Big-Gas companies are moving in. Diamondback Energy, out of Midland, wants to develop a gas-fired power plant in the Permian basin. Chevron has partnered with Engine No. 1 and GE Vernova to leverage their gas turbines. ExxonMobil are in, but haven't revealed their nascent projects. NRG Energy, who develops gas-fired power plants, has acquired six power plants last month, the first in a decade. To generate more electricity for AI, it makes sense to expand commercially proven SoWiBess renewables rather than natural gas. Battery storage prices have come down significantly since 2023, and this may continue. With this, the cost advantage lies with solar and batteries—and it's also cleaner energy than fossil gas plants, as desired by the big digital companies. Gas is likely to be a small part of the solution, especially since the U.S. produces more than any other nation. But urgent new gas-fired plants for AI power will be difficult to come by because there currently exists a gas turbine backlog. GE's backlog of gas turbines was $73 billion as of January 1, 2025. Nuclear SMRs and geothermal are barely proven commercially, and are expensive. Altogether, cheap and reliable clean electricity for AI data centers can best be provided by solar and battery storage, as the S&P Global study found. In the U.S., renewables (excluding nuclear) accounted for about 90% of new installed capacity in 2024. In this, the market has spoken about accessible power for AI data centers. Renewables plus battery storage (SoWiBess) now make up 30% of U.S. power capacity. In the U.S., installed solar capacity now totals 220 GW. Batteries doubled in 2024 to 29 GW, and are likely to grow almost 50% in 2025. This dispatchable energy from batteries stabilizes the U.S. power supply. The U.S. has only to look down under to Australia to see how in 16 years one state has gone from zero to 75% renewable electricity, and it expects to reach 100% by 2027. Discerning statements have been made by people in the know about electrical power: gas versus renewables. One by Brian Faist of Avangrid, who owns the solar farm at Waco, Texas, which will provide power for Meta's new data center at Temple: 'You have development cycles for thermal [gas] plants that are pretty long. For wind, that's pretty long. Solar is just the fastest.' And from Jason Grumet, CEO of American Clean Power Association, in a panel at CERAWeek: 'The energy that is moving forward in this country right now is clean power.'
