Scott Kidwell
Politically, energy transition has been a topic of high importance for many around the country. This has been largely spurred by the idea that hydrocarbon-based energy is bad for the environment. Rarely is it discussed by those with complaints about-hydrocarbon based energy what the benefits are to society, some of which are often taken greatly for granted, such as reliability and improved quality of life. The benefits of hydrocarbon based energy, or the loss of those benefits when a system relies too heavily on more intermittent alternatives, came front and center because of an incredible winter storm that swept through the central portion of the United States, impacting both Texans and New Mexicans.
According to Commissioner Christi Craddick, who is the chairman of the Railroad Commission of Texas, during the winter storm that wreaked havoc on her state in early February, 99.95 percent of Texas residential natural gas customers received gas to heat their homes. The .05 percent who lost service amounted to just over 2,000 customers, a tiny figure in comparison to a total pool of more than 4 million who use gas for heating their homes. The amazing success rate is absolutely a critical statistic to keep in mind as we move forward looking for answers as to why electrical demand was not as reliably met. So that it does not go unsaid, while renewables are absolutely a part of energy production going forward, the use of hydrocarbons for fuel and energy isn’t going anywhere anytime soon, unless we’re willing to accept an even less reliable system and a lesser quality of life. If a less reliable system means that more lives are in danger, that’s not a system in which any of us should be interested.
Speaking of less reliable systems, while the delivery of natural gas to homes was incredibly reliable during possibly the worst winter disaster in Texas on record, according to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) approximately 48.6 percent of electric generation was forced out at the highest point due to “impacts of various extreme weather conditions.” When Texans needed it the most, natural gas was not only available, it was reliable. Electricity for the state was not as reliable. However, that’s not the point I want to discuss in this column.
As each of you know, hydrocarbons supply an ever-expansive range of products and benefits to society. On the energy side alone, during the storm not only was natural gas providing heat for homes, it was also generating electricity to help stem the severity of power outages around the state, at one point producing around 60 percent of the base generation (up from less than 20 percent before the storm). Too often those who want the end of the hydrocarbon industry—or the fossil fuel industry, as they like to call it—don’t seem to understand or don’t care about the benefits that hydrocarbons provide.
Without hydrocarbons, the worst winter storm in Texas recorded history would have been even worse. The losses, both in lives and in financial terms, would have been even greater. There are changes that need to be made to Texas’ energy production and delivery system. After the failures experienced during the winter storm, that isn’t in question. One of those changes, however, is not the shrinking of the oil and natural gas industry. If anything, I’d say we need the hydrocarbon industry to once again play a more prominent role in Texas’ portfolio of energy production. If that had been the case prior to the winter storm, maybe the reliability of electricity delivery would have looked more similar to the delivery of natural gas. While that wasn’t the case, those of us that know the industry better than anyone else should be stepping to the front of the line to offer solutions on how to keep the failures that occurred during the winter storm from ever occurring again. The PBPA is doing just that. Reach out to our staff or leadership to learn how, and to find out how you can make sure your voice is heard while we all work for solutions.