Search This Blog

Wednesday, January 29, 2025

Department of Government Efficiency

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
U.S. DOGE Service Temporary Organization
Logo as of January 2025
 

The Eisenhower Executive Office Building, where the DOGE office is located

 
Temporary organization overview
FormedJanuary 20, 2025
JurisdictionU.S. federal government
HeadquartersEisenhower Executive Office Building, Washington, D.C., U.S.
Temporary organization executive
Parent AgencyUnited States DOGE Service
Websitedoge.gov

The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), officially the U.S. DOGE Service Temporary Organization, is a temporary organization under the United States DOGE Service, formerly known as the United States Digital Service. Despite the name, DOGE is not a federal executive department, the creation of which would require the approval of the U.S. Congress.

DOGE's initial stated purpose was to reduce wasteful spending and eliminate unnecessary regulations. However, according to the executive order that established it, its formal purpose is to "modernize federal technology and software to maximize governmental efficiency and productivity".

Led by businessman Elon Musk, the organization was announced by then president-elect Donald Trump in November 2024 for his second term. Initially, Vivek Ramaswamy was to co-lead with Musk, but he left before the project began. The organization was created by executive order on January 20, 2025, and was scheduled to end on July 4, 2026. DOGE has an office in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building and will have about 20 employees there with teams embedded in federal agencies.

History

Conception

The idea of DOGE has been linked to Trump's campaign promises to cut federal spending and reduce the size of government and the size of the federal fiscal deficit.

The concept of DOGE emerged in a discussion between Elon Musk and Donald Trump, where Musk floated the idea of a department for streamlining government efficiency. In August 2024, Trump said at a campaign event that, if he were elected, he would be open to giving Musk an advisory role. In response, Musk wrote a post on X saying "I am willing to serve", along with an AI-created image of him standing in front of a lectern marked "Department of Government Efficiency". The organization's acronym DOGE has been described as referencing dogecoin, a cryptocurrency that Musk promotes, and the DOGE website's official launch prominently featured the dogecoin logo of a Shiba Inu dog. Later, the suggestion was made by Trump of establishing such a department and for it to be headed by Musk.

Musk has suggested that the organization could help to cut the U.S. federal budget by up to US$2 trillion through measures such as reducing waste, abolishing redundant agencies, and downsizing the federal workforce. Ramaswamy also stated that DOGE may eliminate entire federal agencies and reduce the number of federal employees by as much as 75%. DOGE may attempt to do this through re-enacting Schedule F. Musk has also proposed consolidating the number of federal agencies from more than 400 to fewer than 100.

Musk has described deregulation as the only path to the SpaceX Mars colonization program, and promised he will "get the government off people's back and out of their pocket".

The organization is similar to attempts before it, including president Theodore Roosevelt's Keep Commission, president Ronald Reagan's appointment of J. Peter Grace to lead the Grace Commission, and vice president Al Gore's National Partnership for Reinventing Government.

Planning and member acquisition

On November 5, 2024, Musk suggested that former U.S. representative and two-time Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul could work with DOGE.

On November 14, on social media, Musk called for individuals who were interested in working for the organization to send CVs to DOGE's X account via DM. It was noted at the time that, because Musk's platform does not allow non-premium accounts to DM premium or verified accounts by default, only those who subscribed to X's paid premium service could submit their CVs in this way. DOGE's X account has since allowed direct messages from non-premium accounts.

On December 22, Trump announced that Katie Miller, the wife of incoming deputy chief of staff for policy Stephen Miller, would be joining DOGE.

On January 19, 2025, it was reported by CBS News that Ramaswamy was expected to step away from DOGE to instead run for the governorship of Ohio. CBS also reported there had been internal friction between Ramaswamy and Musk, with Musk's supporters reportedly "privately undercutting" Ramaswamy and encouraging him to depart from DOGE over his alleged lack of engagement with the project. On January 20, 2025, following the Second Presidential Inauguration of Trump, the White House clarified that Ramaswamy would not be serving in DOGE. On January 27, Ramaswamy said that he had resigned after a "mutual discussion" with Musk. Ramaswamy described his own focus as "a constitutional law, legislative-based approach," in contrast with Musk's "technology approach, which is the future approach."

On January 21, The New York Times reported that the Executive Order establishing DOGE would rename the United States Digital Service to "United States DOGE Service" and create "DOGE teams" embedded within federal agencies consisting of at least four special government employees that would have "full and prompt access to all unclassified agency records, software systems and IT systems" to the "maximum extent consistent with law." Officially, the group's goal is to advance the "president's DOGE agenda" by "modernizing federal technology and software to maximize governmental efficiency and productivity". The budget of the service was unknown, and several of the employees were expected to be unpaid volunteers.

Congressional caucus and proposed subcommittee

On November 19, 2024, representatives Aaron Bean and Pete Sessions launched the Delivering Outstanding Government Efficiency Caucus to support the DOGE mission.

Plans to create a new congressional subcommittee were announced on November 21 by House Oversight Committee chairman James Comer (R-KY). This new subcommittee will be called the Delivering on Government Efficiency Subcommittee, will be chaired by representative Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), and will work closely with DOGE to reduce governmental expenditures. On November 22, senator Joni Ernst (R-IA) was appointed to lead the corresponding Senate DOGE Caucus.

In December 2024, Ernst proposed a bill dubbed "DRAIN THE SWAMP Act", which would require each executive agency to relocate at least 30 percent of employees working at Washington, D.C., headquarters to offices located outside of the D.C. metro area; while also restricting the ability to telework.

Bipartisan collaboration

As of December 2024, representative Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) is the only Democrat to have joined the newly formed DOGE caucus in Congress. He has proposed reorganizing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) by potentially removing agencies such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Secret Service from its jurisdiction. This proposal aims to reduce the size of the DHS.

Functions

Despite its name, DOGE is not a federal executive department, which would require an act of Congress to create. Vox said that the body is "unlikely to have any regulatory teeth on its own, but there's little doubt that it can have influence on the incoming administration and how it will determine its budgets".

Donald Trump said the body would help to "dismantle government bureaucracy, slash excess regulations, cut wasteful expenditures and restructure federal agencies". He also stated that DOGE will work with the Office of Management and Budget to address what he called "massive waste and fraud" in government spending.

Eliminating agencies

On November 27, 2024, Musk proposed eliminating the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

On December 12, 2024, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Trump team and officials from DOGE had inquired about abolishing the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). It also reported on several differing plans to combine and restructure the FDIC, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and Federal Reserve.

Lifespan

According to tweets by Musk and Ramaswamy, the ultimate goal of DOGE is to become so efficient that it eventually eliminates its own necessity. The organization has a set expiration date of July 4, 2026, the United States Semiquincentennial (250th anniversary), which follows Ramaswamy's idea that most government projects should have clear expiration dates.

Trump stated that the entity's work will "conclude" no later than July 4, 2026, also coinciding with a proposed "Great American Fair". Trump called the proposed results of DOGE "the perfect gift to America".

Reception and analysis

An infographic on outlays and revenues in the 2023 US federal budget

Support

Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase, the largest American bank, has supported the idea of creating DOGE to improve government competency. Brian Armstrong, CEO of Coinbase, has also spoken in support of the idea.

Javier Milei, the president of Argentina, stated that, prior to the official announcement of the creation of DOGE, Musk had called Federico Sturzenegger, Argentina's minister of deregulation and transformation of the state, to discuss imitating his ministry's model in the United States.

On January 10, 2025, 26 Republican state governors wrote a joint letter to leaders of Congress expressing, "overwhelming support for President Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)". The governors also stated that they are committed to "stand ready to help DOGE—and Congress—be successful".

Bipartisan support of defense spending cuts

In December 2024, senator Bernie Sanders praised Musk on the plans by DOGE to cut defense spending; he stated that "Elon Musk is right. The Pentagon, with a budget of $886 billion, just failed its 7th audit in a row. It's lost track of billions." Democratic congressman Ro Khanna also indicated that he would be open to working with DOGE to reduce defense spending.

Skepticism of goals, promises, and mandate

On October 28, 2024, at a Trump campaign rally in Madison Square Garden, Musk stated that he believed DOGE could reduce federal government spending by $2 trillion (a figure higher than the federal government's total discretionary spending in 2023). After the election, he said $2 trillion would be a best-case scenario, but he had a "good shot" at cutting $1 trillion. Musk has not specified whether these savings would be made over a single year or a longer period; federal budget experts generally assess fiscal matters over a 10-year budget window.

In November, Politico reported on growing concern from the tech world and several policy experts that the project was over-promising or could potentially tear down "much of the essential infrastructure that ushers along American innovation". Former US deputy chief technology officer Jennifer Pahlka stated that while civil service reform was needed, mass firings was the wrong answer. Senior fellow Brian Riedl at the Manhattan Institute said that DOGE's plan to fire 25% of the federal workforce would reduce only 1% of federal funding and require the hiring of contractors to fulfill the difference. The Washington Post cited critics who stated balancing the budget would require higher taxes or cuts to Medicare or Social Security, and DOGE's proposal to slash federal programs that Congress funds but whose authority had lapsed would cut "veterans' health care, initiatives at the State and Justice departments and NASA, and multiple major antipoverty programs". The Post also cited budget experts who said Musk and Ramaswamy's plan "demonstrates the pair's misunderstanding of how the government works".

Douglas Holtz-Eakin of the American Action Forum compared DOGE to the former Grace Commission which had zero of its 150 proposals enacted. According to chief economist Mark Zandi of Moody's, the 30% of the federal budget that is non-discretionary is at the lowest level in modern history as a percentage of GDP, and that even finding $200 billion of savings was highly unlikely. Senior director for federal budget policy Bobby Kogan at the Center for American Progress said that the "threat level for DOGE's recommendations making it through Congress is relatively low", and that $2 trillion in cuts would likely result in 33% cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and every program relating to veterans compensation and healthcare. Maya MacGuineas of the public policy organization Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has said that $2 trillion in savings is "absolutely doable" over a period of 10 years, but it would be difficult to do in a single year "without compromising some of the fundamental objectives of the government that are widely agreed upon". Desmond Lachman of American Enterprise Institute stated that "realistically, there isn't much political willingness to do the tough stuff that [needs] to be done to get the budget under control."

The committee has been seen as potentially redundant to the Government Accountability Office.

Legality

Questions have been raised whether Musk's and Ramaswamy's companies being contractors to the federal government causes a conflict of interest with their proposed work in DOGE.

Democratic representative Zoe Lofgren has criticized DOGE, calling it "unconstitutional and illegal" in relation to its proposals regarding the impoundment of appropriated funds by Congress.

Lawsuit

On January 20, 2025, the day of Trump's inauguration, The Washington Post learned of a pending lawsuit to be launched against DOGE mere minutes after Trump was to be sworn in. The lawsuit questioned whether DOGE is a presidential advisory commission obeying federal transparency rules about certain practices, such as disclosure and hiring. That same day, several lawsuits were filed against President Trump and the Office of Management and Budget, alleging violation of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which requires that "the advisory committee have a fair balance in viewpoints represented, that they do not meet in secret, and that their records and work product be made available for public inspection."

Googlization

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Googlization is a neologism that describes the expansion of Google's search technologies and aesthetics into more markets, web applications, and contexts, including traditional institutions such as the library (see Google Books Library Project). The rapid rise of search media, particularly Google, is part of new media history and draws attention to issues of access and to relationships between commercial interests and media.

History of term

In 2003, John Battelle and Alex Salkever first introduced the term googlization to mean the dominance of Google over nearly all forms of informational commerce on the web. Initially specializing in text-based Internet searching, Google has expanded its services to include image searching, web-based email, online mapping, video sharing, news delivery, instant messaging, mobile phones, and services aimed at the academic community. Google has entered partnerships with established media interests such as Time Warner AOL, News Corporation, The New York Times, and various news agencies such as the Associated Press, Agence France-Presse, and the Press Association. Google has therefore become a giant with complex entanglements with traditional and new media.

Definition

The term Googlization is not universally accepted as a definition for this phenomenon. According to Harro Haijboer, Googlization seems to be an undisputed term, most of the time the term is taken for fact without critically investigating it.

The term may be valid in current development but, after a critical look at the history of search engines, may not be as correctly formulated as one might think. My main questions are if the term Googlization is correct in a historical perspective? If Microsoft search engines (MSN, Live Search and Bing) are Googlized? …or if Google is "Microsoftized"? I suspected to find evidence that both search engines (Microsoft and Google) have had their influence onto each other. There is no way of saying if Googlization has fully taken place on Microsoft search or that there has been a form of "Microsoftization" on the part of Google. In this light the term Googlization seems to be inappropriate and should be rethought of.

Many information professionals would define the term as "digitizing a library or making something into a Google product". However, the definition is constantly and rapidly changing. Googlization can also mean that ever "increasing amounts of accessible information [are] available on the Internet; Google makes it easy and convenient to find in one place"; however, Google only makes information which already exists more accessible, rather than creating new information.

Development

Since 2000, media scholars have analyzed and are aware of the impact of Googlization to modern human society. Geert Lovink argues against the society's growing dependency on Google search retrieval. Richard A. Rogers points out that Googlization connotes media concentration—an important political economy style critique of Google's taking over of one service after another online; Liz Losh also claims that the Googlization of the BNF has brought considerable public attention in major magazine and newspapers in France.

The Googlization of Everything, a book published in March 2011 by Siva Vaidhyanathan, provides a critical interpretation of how Google is disrupting culture, commerce, and community. In Vaidhyanathan's own words "the book will answer three key questions: What does the world look like through the lens of Google?; How is Google's ubiquity affecting the production and dissemination of knowledge?; and how has the corporation altered the rules and practices that govern other companies, institutions, and states?" Vaidhyanathan defines Googlization as how, "... since the search engine first appeared and spread through word of mouth for a dozen years, Google has permeated our culture. ... Google is used as a noun and a verb everywhere from adolescent conversations to scripts for Sex and the City." Vaidhyanathan, also has a blog where he documented the development of the book and any developments or news about Googlization and Google in general. His basic argument is that we may approve of Google today, but the company very easily could use our information against us in ways that are beneficial to its business, not society. Both the book and the blog are subtitled "How One Company Is Disrupting Culture, Commerce, and Community… and Why we Should Worry."

Criticisms of googlization

The founders of Google have encountered hostility to their enterprise almost since its inception, both in the form of general press criticism and actual legal action. Various lawsuits have included infringement of copyright law; its dealings with advertising companies and in the volume of advertising that its users encounter.

Google has been notorious for its use of PageRank, an algorithm used by Google Search to rank websites in their search engine results. PageRank is a way of measuring the importance of website pages. According to Google: "PageRank works by counting the number and quality of links to a page to determine a rough estimate of how important the website is. The underlying assumption is that more important websites are likely to receive more links from other websites."

"Despite the pragmatic devotion to the technological virtues of speed, precision, comprehensiveness, and honesty in computer-generated results" Google has on occasion imposed human intervention and judgement, "from within the system, rather than rely on the slow-changing collective judgement of the users." A prominent example of this occurred in April 2004, when the first search result, Wikipedia's entry for "Jew", was replaced with the homepage of an anti-semitic website called Jew Watch. Google also intervened with the PageRank algorithm when pages denying that the slaughter of 6 million Jews occurred during the Second World War were high first-page results for the Google search "Holocaust" or "Jew".

Another controversial event in Google's past occurred in early February 2010, when Google deleted years worth of archives from six popular music blogs due to receiving several DMCA notices from music copyright holders alleging that music was being shared illegally.

Despite Google's general market dominance, some of its offshoots and additional projects have been less than successful. Nexus One (direct-to-customer sales) and Google Buzz (social networking site) all encountered problems when they were first established, problems which they are still struggling with.

Defense of googlization

Google's corporate mission is "to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful".

Amongst ordinary internet users, Google is viewed fairly favorably as a search tool and as a company in general. About 82 percent of Americans expressed a favorable opinion of Google overall, according to one national survey.

In late March 2010, Google discontinued its local domain for China while continuing to offer their uncensored Hong Kong–based domain. Google had initially offered a censored version of their search engine in China. They reversed this decision when they decided that it was in conflict with their mission and their ideals. Speaking for Google, one of its founders, Sergey Brin, said "One of the reasons I am glad we are making this move in China is that the China situation was really emboldening other countries to try and implement their own firewalls." In another interview, Brin said "For us it has always been a discussion about how we can best fight for openness on the Internet. We believe that this is the best thing that we can do for preserving the principles of the openness and freedom of information on the Internet."

When Google went public in 2004, founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin promised Google would commit to philanthropy by dedicating 1% of its profit, 1% of its equity, and its employees' time to charitable effort, including Google.org. Page wrote investors that Google's philanthropy could someday "eclipse Google itself in terms of overall world impact."

Economic nationalism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_nationalism

Economic nationalism
or nationalist economics is an ideology that prioritizes state intervention in the economy, including policies like domestic control and the use of tariffs and restrictions on labor, goods, and capital movement. The core belief of economic nationalism is that the economy should serve nationalist goals. As a prominent modern ideology, economic nationalism stands in contrast to economic liberalism and economic socialism.

Economic nationalists oppose globalization and some question the benefits of unrestricted free trade. They favor protectionism and advocate for self-sufficiency. To economic nationalists, markets are to be subordinate to the state, and should serve the interests of the state (such as providing national security and accumulating military power). The doctrine of mercantilism is a prominent variant of economic nationalism. Economic nationalists tend to see international trade as zero-sum, where the goal is to derive relative gains (as opposed to mutual gains).

Economic nationalism tends to emphasize industrialization (and often aids industries with state support), due to beliefs that industry has positive spillover effects on the rest of the economy, enhances the self-sufficiency and political autonomy of the country, and is a crucial aspect in building military power.

History

While the coining of the term "economic patriotism" has been attributed to French parliamentarian Bernard Carayon, there is evidence that the phrase has been in use since earlier times to describe nationalist intervention by the state. In an early instance of its use, speechwriter William Safire in 1985, in defending President Reagan's proposal of the national Strategic Defense Initiative missile defense system, wrote, "Our common denominator is nationalism – both a military and economic patriotism – which inclines us to the side of pervasive national defense."

In the mid-to-late 1800s, Italian economic thinkers began to gravitate towards the theories of Friedrich List. Led by Italian economists like Alessandro Rossi, policies favoring nationalist protectionism of industries gained momentum. The Italian government had previously been ignoring Italian industry in favor of trade with France, and it seemed content to watch other European powers modernize and gain influence through their colonies. Various groups began to put pressure on the Italian government, from textile to ceramic manufacturers, and although the Italian government imposed tariffs the industrialists felt that it was not enough. The push for economic nationalism with industrialization and protectionism quickly spun Italy into an economic crisis in 1887, exposing Italian industrial woes.

The Austro-Hungarian empire’s ethnic diversity made it an unusual case of the rise of European nationalism. The fall of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, while mostly caused by the empire's defeat in World War I, was also caused by the lack of economic and political integration between Austrians and Slavs. Though Hungary relied on Austria economically, as it provided a market for Hungary's agriculture production, there was a deep social and economic rift between the Austrians and Slavic people, who actively boycotted and protested Austrian rule in favor of more autonomy in the Balkans. Regions within the empire began using forms of price discrimination to strengthen national economies. As a result, intra-empire trade began to fail. Grain prices fluctuated throughout the empire after the 1880s into World War I, however an ethnic breakdown of the empire showed that grain trade between two predominantly Austrian territories, or two predominantly Slavic territories, led to a gradual decrease in grain prices from the 1870s up to World War I. This was mainly due to the increased presence of railroads in the late 1800s. The only trade pairing that did not observe decreasing grain prices were two territories of varying nationality. Overall, grain prices were cheaper, and the price gap was smaller, when the two territories trading more closely resembled each other ethnically and linguistically.

At an economic summit in September 1974, one topic of discussion was the gradual dissolution of economic barriers to the movement of goods, people and services across borders in the post World War II era. According to William E. Simon, who was United States Treasury Secretary at that time, there was concern that inflation would motivate economic nationalism: "This has had enormously beneficial effect; Now, however, there is some danger that inflation may drive countries in economic nationalism."

Philosophy

The philosophical foundations of economic nationalism are difficult to trace due to the ideology's lengthy history and its unique appeal to different types of groups. The four general pillars come from its political, cultural, economic, and social roots. Though details surrounding these four pillars may differ depending on a nation's status, generally a nation's own status and economic stability takes precedence over another. During the late-19th and early-20th century this meant an emphasis on protectionism, increased role of the government, and even colonialism, as it was a means of modifying an occupied country's culture and creed.

In both Germany and Italy, Friedrich List played an influential role in the rise in economic nationalism during the 1800s. List brought elements of economic theory and national identity together, as he postulated that an individual's quality of life was in correlation with the success of their country and was a well-known proponent of tariffs in the United States. List's ideas on economics and nationalism directly challenged the economic theories of Adam Smith, as List felt that Smith reduced the role of national identity too much and favored of a globalized approach which ignored certain complexities of political life.

Modern examples

As a policy is a deliberate system of principles to guide decisions and achieve rational outcomes, the following list of would be examples of an economic nationalistic policy, where there is consistent and rational doctrine associated with each individual protectionist measure:

  • Proposed takeover of Arcelor (Spain, France and Luxembourg) by Mittal Steel Company (India)
  • French governmental listing of Danone (France) as a 'strategic industry' to pre-empt a potential takeover bid by PepsiCo (USA)
  • Blocked takeover of Autostrade, an Italian toll-road operator by the Spanish company Abertis
  • Proposed takeover of Endesa (Spain) by E.ON (Germany), and the counter-bid by Gas Natural (Spain)
  • Proposed takeover of Suez (France) by Enel (Italy), and the counter-bid by Gaz de France (France)
  • United States Congressional opposition to the takeover bid for Unocal (USA) by CNOOC (PR China), and the subsequent takeover by Chevron (USA)
  • Political opposition in 2006 to sell port management businesses in six major U.S. seaports to Dubai Ports World based in the United Arab Emirates
  • Limits on foreign participation and ownership in Russia's natural resource sectors and selected Russian industries, beginning in 2008

The reason for a policy of economic protectionism in the cases above varied from bid to bid. In the case of Mittal's bid for Arcelor, the primary concerns involved job security for the Arcelor employees based in France and Luxembourg. The cases of French Suez and Spanish Endesa involved the desire for respective European governments to create a 'national champion' capable of competing at both a European and global level. Both the French and US government used national security as the reason for opposing takeovers of Danone, Unocal, and the bid by DP World for 6 US ports. In none of the examples given above was the original bid deemed to be against the interests of competition. In many cases the shareholders supported the foreign bid. For instance in France after the bid for Suez by Enel was counteracted by the French public energy and gas company Gaz De France the shareholders of Suez complained and the unions of Gaz De France were in an uproar because of the privatization of their jobs.

The modern phenomenon of the European Union has in part led to a recent resurgence of economic nationalism. Western Europe as a whole has become more economically globalized since the end of World War II, embracing economic integration and introducing the euro. This did lead to positive economic impacts, such as steady wage increases. However, from the 1990s through the Great Recession, there has been an increasing distrust in this globalized system. With rising income inequalities and little protection against natural economic occurrences, many Europeans have begun to embrace economic nationalism. This is because modern European nationalists see their nation's economy becoming generally more globalized at the expense of one's own economic status. Globalization, like the type one can observe in the European Union, is easy to oppose as it creates winners and losers. Those who lose their jobs due to globalization are more likely to be drawn to parties espousing economic nationalism.

Although some European nations were impacted differently, nations that saw an increased exposure to the China trade shock did move significantly further right politically and generally supported more nationalist and protectionist policies. Even industries which did not see increased exposure to the China trade shock generally shifted towards right wing policies. This shows that, while some voters shifted their political support due to their worsening economic conditions, many voters shifted to right-wing policy due to a community-wide reaction from the China trade shock. Although the shock took place in the 1980s, its economic effects still impact the European electorate today. In particular, the Brexit vote showed the impact this shock had on the electorate, as regions which were most impacted by the China trade shock were still economically weak (in terms of GDP per capita) in comparison to other regions like London, even over a decade later. There is a strong positive correlation in regions most impacted by the China trade shock and an increase in votes to leave the European Union.

Immigration plays a large part in the policy of modern economic nationalists. With a considerable influx of immigration, particularly from parts of eastern Europe and the Middle East, those who gravitate towards economic nationalism find that their national identity and culture has been diluted by increased immigration. Although studies have shown marginal improvements to both native employment and wages when put in competition with immigrants.

The impact of Europe's move towards a globalized economy has led to the passing of nationalist policies and the support of right-wing populist parties, which generally espouse nationalist and socially conservative views, although there was also a growth in support for left-wing populist parties, such as Podemos in Spain and Syriza in Greece. Such parties have formed governments in a number of European countries, including Poland (Law and Justice), Hungary (Fidesz), and, arguably, the United Kingdom, where the Conservative Party, headed by PM Boris Johnson, has absorbed the vast majority of UKIP's support since Brexit. This is a prominent example of the rise in nationalism and anti-globalization, as Brexit, a result of lengthy campaigns by UKIP and the Eurosceptic faction of the Conservatives for a national referendum, is regarded by many opponents as a manifestation of economic (and social) nationalism, and right-wing populism more broadly. However, the majority of UK opinion polls since Brexit in have shown support for rejoining the EU, or ceasing the Brexit process during the period 2016-2020, in part likely due to the economic impacts of the deal agreed by the EU and UK.

Criticism

One critical view of economic nationalism is that of Harry Binswanger, an American professor and Objectivist author. Writing for Capitalism Magazine, he argued that consumer preference for local goods gives local producers monopoly power, affording them the ability to lift prices to extract greater profits, and firms that produce locally produced goods can charge a premium for that good. He concluded that consumers who favor products by local producers may end up being exploited by profit-maximizing local producers, and that locally produced goods can attract a premium if consumers show a preference towards it, so firms have an incentive to pass foreign goods off as local goods if foreign goods have cheaper costs of production than local goods. In one example provided by Daniel J. Ikenson for the American libertarian think tank Cato Institute, a protectionist policy in the United States placed tariffs on foreign cars, giving local producers (Ford and GM market) market power that allowed them to raise the price of cars, which he said negatively affected American consumers who faced fewer choices and higher prices. An old criticism of economic nationalism dating back to the late 1920s is that of American social scientist Raymond Leslie Buell, who argued that it contributed to competition and warfare between states as they were motivated to annex territory containing resources, markets and seaports.

Energy in the United States

US energy consumption in 2023

Energy in the United States is obtained from a diverse portfolio of sources, although the majority came from fossil fuels in 2023, as 38% of the nation's energy originated from petroleum, 36% from natural gas, and 9% from coal. Electricity from nuclear power supplied 9% and renewable energy supplied 9%, which includes biomass, wind, hydro, solar and geothermal.

Energy figures are measured in BTU, with 1 BTU equal to 1.055 kJ and 1 quadrillion BTU (1 quad) equal to 1.055 EJ. Because BTU is a unit of heat, sources that generate electricity directly are multiplied by a conversion factor to equate them with sources that use a heat engine.

The United States was the second-largest energy producer and consumer in 2021 after China. The country had a per capita energy consumption of 295 million BTU (311 GJ), ranking it tenth in the world behind Canada, Norway, and several Arabian nations. Consumption in 2023 was mostly for industry (33%) and transportation (30%), with use in homes (20%) and commercial buildings (17%) making up the remainder.

The United States' portion of the electrical grid in North America had a nameplate capacity of 1,280 GW and produced 4,029 TWh in 2023, using 34% of primary energy to do so. The country is the second-largest producer and consumer of electricity, behind China. Natural gas overtook coal as the dominant source for electric generation in 2016. Coal was overtaken by nuclear for the first time in 2020 and by renewables in 2023.

History

Per capita energy use by source
The percentage of energy use by source

From its founding until the late 19th century, population and energy use in the United States both increased by about 3% per year, resulting in a relatively constant per capita energy use of 100 million BTU. Wood made up the majority of this until near the end of the 1800s, meaning the average American burned eight tons of wood each year.

The Industrial Revolution in the United States saw an increased use of coal. By the late 1800s, it surpassed wood as the major source of energy, as it was cheaper for those living in cities. Lighting, heating and transportation could all be fueled by coal. Between 1925 and 1975, coal use was more stagnant, although it dominated the growing electricity sector. Petroleum and natural gas took its place, as car ownership doubled in the two decades after the war, and as the number of pipelines rose dramatically.

During the first half of the 20th century, per capita energy use doubled to 200 million BTU, and reached 300 million BTU by the late 60s. After a peak of 360 million BTU in 1979, per capita consumption generally declined, and dipped below 300 million BTU in 2020. In comparison, the world average increased from 68 to 74 million BTU (72 to 78 GJ) per person between 1980 and 2020.

Domestic oil production peaked in 1970 and did not recover for 40 years. However, oil imports allowed consumption to double. Oil represented the vast majority of net imports during this time. Increased reliance on imported oil coincided with the 1973 oil crisis.

Total imports peaked in 2005, when they represented 30% of total consumption. A consistent decline occurred over the next 15 years, as oil production doubled and domestic use receded. This allowed the United States to be a net exporter of energy for the first time in 70 years. As of 2021, the US net exports 3.9% of energy production.

Around 2010, many other trends began to reverse. By 2020, improvements in fracking had allowed natural gas production to increase by more than half, while coal decreased by half.

Renewables in the 20th century consisted mainly of hydro and wood. Hydro power had been relatively constant since 1970, while wood saw a bump in 1980. Between 2000 and 2020, wind, solar and biofuels increased by a factor of ten. By 2020, wind had surpassed hydro, and biofuels had surpassed wood.

Summary

US energy consumption
by source (2021)
Source % of source
Nuclear 8% 100% Electricity
Renewable
12%
6.9% Residential
2.6% Commercial
19.6% Industrial
12.3% Transport
58.6% Electricity
Natural gas
32%
15.4% Residential
10.8% Commercial
33.4% Industrial
3.9% Transport
36.5% Electricity
Coal
11%
0.1% Commercial
9.8% Industrial
90.0% Electricity
Petroleum
36%
2.6% Residential
2.4% Commercial
25.0% Industrial
69.3% Transport
0.6% Electricity
US electricity
by source and sector (2021)
Source Electricity Sector
22.2% Nuclear
19.5% Renewable
31.7% Natural gas
26.0% Coal
0.6% Petroleum

Sales
35%

Losses
65%

38.9% Residential
34.9% Commercial
26.0% Industrial
0.02% Transport
US energy flow, 2022. Note the loss of waste energy due to the nature of heat engines.
US energy consumption
by sector (2021)
Sector % of sector
Residential
21%
4.0% Renewable
23.5% Natural gas
4.5% Petroleum
68.0% Electricity
Commercial
18%
1.8% Renewable
19.7% Natural gas
0.1% Coal
4.8% Petroleum
73.6% Electricity
Industrial
33%
7.3% Renewable
32.6% Natural gas
3.2% Coal
27.2% Petroleum
29.7% Electricity
Transport
  28%[21]
5.5% Renewable
4.5% Natural gas
89.8% Petroleum
0.2% Electricity

Primary energy production

US energy production in 2023

The United States is the world's second-largest producer of energy. It produces 16% of the world's energy, about three-fourths as much as China. Since 2019, the country has been a net exporter of energy. In 2023, 102.8 quads were produced and net exports were 7.6% of production.

Fossil fuels

Fossil fuels have long produced most energy in the US, accounting for 84% of total production and 60% of electric generation as of 2023. Although costs for some fossil fuels are declining, renewables are becoming cheaper faster. Despite this, use of fossil fuels has remained near 80% for the past 30 years.

The vast majority of carbon emissions in the US came from fossil fuels. The largest sources for carbon pollution from energy were petroleum (46%), natural gas (35%) and coal (19%), and of petroleum, motor gasoline (21%) and diesel (12%) were the largest contributors. As gas has been replacing coal, emissions from the two combined have declined from a peak in 2008, down 25% as of 2021. During the same time frame, petroleum declined by only 17%.

Coal

Coal made up 11% of production in 2021, 90% of which went to producing electricity. Coal electrified rapidly throughout the 50s, 60s and 70s and half of annual electricity was from coal until the 2010s. Coal peaked in 2006, when it represented a third of total energy production. During the 2010s it underwent a steady decline, mostly being replaced by natural gas. In contrast, net exports have remained near 2 quads in the same time period, but this now amounts to 17% of total production.

The decline of coal has many factors, including the aforementioned rise of natural gas, the closing of old plants, and environmental regulations. Coal supply has not become an issue, as the US has the largest coal reserve in the world, 40% larger than Russia.

The first DC plant in the US was a coal plant in New York City, opened in 1882. The first AC plant was a coal plant in Ehrenfeld, Pennsylvania, opened in 1902. Among the largest plants still operating is the James H. Miller Jr. Electric Generating Plant in West Jefferson, Alabama and among the oldest is the James E. Rogers Energy Complex in Mooresboro, North Carolina.

Natural gas

US natural gas production, imports, and exports
Natural gas production by field

Dry natural gas was 36% of production in 2021, making it the largest source of energy in the US. It is also the largest electricity source, making up 38% of generation. Natural gas surpassed coal for production in 2011 and for generation in 2016. Between 2006 and 2022, the US has gone from net importing 4 quads of natural gas to exporting 4 quads.

The United States has been the world's largest producer of natural gas since 2011, when it surpassed Russia. However, the US ranks 7th in proven reserves. Differences in supply explain why gas is cheaper in the US than it is in Europe.

Among the largest natural gas power plants in the US is West County Energy Center in Palm Beach County, Florida. Philadelphia had the first natural gas distributor in the US.

Natural gas liquids are liquid hydrocarbons obtained from natural gas fields. Production has tripled from 2000 to 2022, now making up 9% of fossil fuels. The US leads the world in NGL production, ahead of Saudi Arabia.

During the 2023-24 winter heating season in the United States, natural gas inventories ended at 2,290 billion cubic feet (Bcf), 39% above the five-year average, due to mild weather resulting in reduced consumption. Withdrawals from storage were approximately 1,500 Bcf, lower than the usual 2,000 Bcf. By March 2024, the Henry Hub spot price had decreased to $1.50 per million British thermal units (MMBtu), significantly below the forecasted $3.10/MMBtu, with expectations of prices staying below $2.00/MMBtu until the second half of 2024, averaging $2.20/MMBtu for the year.

Petroleum

US oil production, imports, and exports

Crude oil made up 24% of production in 2021. Oil has more than doubled from a slump in the early 2000s, even surpassing its previous peak in 1970. Imports have declined during the same time period, but the US still net imports 20% of consumption.

The US has been the largest producer of crude oil since 2018, ahead of Saudi Arabia. Texas produces far more oil than any other state.

Nuclear

Cherenkov radiation

Nuclear power was 8.3% of total production and 18.8% of electric generation in 2021. Seven states made up half the total: Illinois (12%), Pennsylvania (10%), South Carolina (7%), Alabama (6%), North Carolina (6%), Texas (5%) and Tennessee (5%).

The US generated 772 TWh of nuclear power in 2022, surpassing China (395 TWh) and France (282 TWh). However, nuclear power constitutes a much smaller percentage of total power generation (18%) when compared to France (63%).

Nuclear had significant growth from the 70s through the 90s, but has stagnated since. A cessation of new nuclear plant construction coincided with the accident at Three Mile Island. Future growth may come from smaller reactors.

Among the largest nuclear plants in the US are Grand Gulf in Claiborne County, Mississippi and Peach Bottom in York County, Pennsylvania. The oldest reactor still in commercial operation is Nine Mile Point in Scriba, New York.

Renewables

Renewable energy sources, 2021.

Renewable energy in the United States accounted for 12.5% of the total production in 2021, and 20.7% of electric generation. The category has seen rapid growth, doubling in total output between 2000 and 2020. They have exceeded nuclear since 2011 and surpassed coal in 2020 for the first time since wood fuel fell out of use.

Renewables are expected to continue growing. Because many of these are variable renewable energy, there are plans for considerable growth in battery storage.

Biomass

An ethanol plant in Nevada, Iowa
Wood burner in Scotia, California

Biomass made up 5% of total production and 38% of renewables in 2022. About 49% of this was biofuels, 43% was wood, and 8% was waste and other biomass.

Ethanol made up the majority of biofuels in 2022, while biodiesel and renewable diesel made up about 16%. For ethanol, about 40% of the available energy is lost or diverted to co-products during the manufacturing process, and the equivalent of 20% is used to power and run the equipment. About 45% of domestic corn output goes toward producing ethanol. The US led the world in ethanol production in 2021, producing more than half of the total. The US is a net exporter of biofuels.

Use of biofuels increased by a factor of 10 between 2000 and 2020, eventually exceeding wood. The desire for ethanol originated from the need to replace methyl tert-butyl ether, which was contaminating groundwater. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 mandated an increased use of ethanol. Most gasoline sold in the US contains up to 10% ethanol.

Industry uses two-thirds of the wood fuel in the US, while the residential sector uses about a quarter. Wood and paper factories use wood waste on-site to reduce their energy costs. About 9% of homes used firewood in 2020.

Wood made up the majority of energy consumption until near the end of the 1800s, after which it declined in total use for several decades, to about half its peak. The 80s saw the first significant increase in over a century, of about 65%, before declining again by the 2010s.

Geothermal

McGinness Hills in Nevada

Two-thirds of the geothermal energy in the US in 2021 was electric, with the remainder being direct use and heat pumps. Geothermal power made up 2% of renewable generation, 70% of which came from California. The Geysers is the largest complex of geothermal energy production in the world. The US ranks first in geothermal capacity, ahead of Indonesia and the Philippines.

Hydro

Grand Coulee Dam in Washington

Hydro made up 6% of electric generation and 29% of renewable generation in 2021. Three states made up over half of the total: Washington (29%), New York (12%) and Oregon (11%). Overall 246 TWh were generated across 1,449 conventional plants and 40 pumped storage plants. As of 2021, the US was fourth in the world in total hydroelectric generation behind Canada and Brazil, each generating over 350 TWh. China produced the most, with an estimated 1,300 TWh.

Hydro has been used in the US since 1880 when it powered the Wolverine Chair factory in Grand Rapids, Michigan. By 1950, 29% of total electricity production came from hydro, as it produced 96 TWh. Hydro generation had tripled by the 70s, but has not consistently grown since. Hydro has had large flucuations from year to year: for example in 2010, generation jumped from 253 to 311 TWh the next year, before dropping to 269 TWh the year after that. While hydro has maintained generation in the 200 to 350 TWh range for the past few decades, its share of the total has declined as other sources have risen. Since 2019, wind power has exceeded hydro as the largest renewable electricity source.

At 132 years old, the plant in Whiting, Wisconsin is the oldest power plant still running in the US. The Grand Coulee Dam is the largest plant for hydro and in general in the US, and the fifth-largest hydro plant in the world. Built in Washington in 1942, it continues to operate with a capacity of 6,765 MW. The Bath County Pumped Storage Station is the second-largest such facility in the world, with a capacity of 3,003 MW.

Solar

Concentrated solar thermal plant (Ivanpah Solar)

Solar made up 4% of electric generation and 19% of renewable generation in 2021. Of the 164 TWh generated, 70% was by utilities and an estimated 30% was small-scale such as rooftop solar. Three states made up over half of total grid generation: California (30%), Texas (13%) and North Carolina (9%). In 2021, the US grid produced the second most solar power in the world, behind China's 328 GWh.

Since 2006, solar has been the fastest growing energy source in the US, expanding 50% per year on average. The largest solar farms in the US include Solar Star in Rosamond, California, Desert Sunlight in Desert Center, California and Copper Mountain in Boulder City, Nevada. The Bureau of Land Management leases federal land to be used for solar farms.

Almost all states employ net metering to compensate owners of small-scale solar, although policies by state vary considerably.

Wind

Wind turbines in Maine

Wind made up 9% of electric generation and 44% of renewable generation in 2021. Four states made up over half of the total: Texas (26%), Iowa (10%), California (9%) and Kansas (7%). The US grid produces significantly more wind power than Germany or India, but less than half of China.

Since 1998, wind power has grown 23% per year on average in the US. Prominent areas for wind turbines include Alta Wind in Kern County, California, Shepherds Flat in Gilliam County, Oregon and Roscoe Wind Farm in Nolan County, Texas.

Final energy consumption

Consumption by sector, 2021
An example of each consumption sector: a refinery, a house, a car and an office

Industry has long been the country's largest energy sector. It used 33% of total energy in 2021, most of which was divided evenly between natural gas, electricity and petroleum. A survey from 2018 estimated that the largest energy users were the chemical industry (30%), petroleum and coal processing (18%), mining (9%) and paper (9%).

The most energy-intensive industry was by far petroleum and coal, at over 30 billion BTU per employee. The paper industry was second at 6.5 billion BTU per employee. Each of these handles energy sources as part of their raw materials (fossil fuels and wood). The same survey found that half of the electric use was to drive machines and about 10% each for heating, cooling and electro-chemical processes. Most of the remainder was for factory lighting and HVAC. About half of the natural gas was for process heating, and most of the rest was for boilers.

Transportation used 28% of energy, almost all of which was petroleum and other fuels. Half of the combustible fuels that make up the transportation sector were gasoline, and half of the vehicle usage was for cars and small trucks. Diesel and heavier trucks each made up about a quarter of their respective categories; jet fuel and aircraft were about a tenth each. Biofuels such as ethanol and biodiesel made up 5%, while natural gas was 4%. Electricity from mass transit was 0.2%; electricity for light passenger vehicles is counted in other sectors, but figures from the US Department of Energy estimate that 2.1 million electric vehicles used 6.1 TWh to travel 19 billion miles, indicating an average fuel efficiency of 3.1 miles per kWh.

Over two-thirds of the energy used by homes, offices, and other commercial businesses is electric, including electric losses. Most of the energy used in homes was for space heating (34%) and water heating (19%), much more than the amount used for space cooling (16%) and refrigeration (7%). Businesses use similar percentages for space cooling and refrigeration. They use less for space and water heating but more for lighting and cooking.

Most homes in the US are single-family detached, which on average use almost triple the energy of apartments in larger buildings. However, single family households have 50% more persons and triple the floor space. Usage per square foot of living space is roughly equal for most housing types except small apartment buildings and mobile homes. Small apartments are more likely to be older than other housing types, while mobile homes tend to have poor insulation.

Regional variation

The state with the lowest per capita energy use is Rhode Island, at 161 million BTU per year, and the highest is Louisiana, at 908 million BTU per year. Energy use and prices often have an inverse relationship; Hawaii uses some of the least energy per capita but pays the highest price on average, while Louisiana pays the least on average.

Residential prices follow a similar trend, but the differences between states are usually less drastic. The exception is Hawaii, which pays 84 cents per million BTU, more than double the next largest state of Florida, which pays 33 cents.

Household energy use varies by home type and by region. Although single-family detached homes are less common in the Northeast, the average house there uses 60% more energy than one in the West. Some of the regional differences can be explained by climate, as two-thirds of northeastern homes are in cold regions, while less than a third of western homes are.

The land-use decisions of cities and towns also explain some of the regional differences in energy use. Townhouses are more energy efficient than single-family homes because less heat, for example, is used per person. Similarly, areas with more homes in a compact neighborhood encourage walking, biking and transit, thereby reducing transportation energy use. A 2011 U.S. EPA study found that multi-family homes in urban neighborhoods, with well-insulated buildings and fuel-efficient cars, use less than two-thirds of the energy used by conventionally built single-family houses in suburban areas (with standard cars).

Electricity

United States power stations by type and nameplate capacity
Generation by source

The United States is the world's second-largest producer and consumer of electricity. It generates 15% of the world's electricity supply, about half as much as China.

The United States produced 3,988 TWh in 2021. Total generation has been flat since 2010. Net electricity imports were 39 TWh, or about 1% of sales. Historically, net imports have been between just under 0% to just over 1.5%.

Fossil fuels made up the majority of generation, with natural gas providing 38% and coal 23%. Petroleum provided less than 1%. Natural gas as a proportion of fossil fuels has been increasing since the 90's, with coal peaking around 2008 and natural gas becoming the top fossil fuel in 2016.

Nuclear provided 20%, a level consistent since about 1990. Nuclear surpassed coal in 2020 for the first time, as coal dipped to its lowest proportion in over 70 years.

Among renewables, wind and solar continued to expand, with wind exceeding hydro since 2019. Renewable use has doubled from 2010 to 2020, reaching 21% of total generation.

Grid capacity

The United States had a nameplate generation capacity of 1,213 GW in 2021. The following table summarizes the electrical energy generated by fuel source for the United States grid in 2021. Figures account for generation losses, but not transmission losses. Fission had the highest capacity factor, while petroleum had the lowest.

The US grid first connected East and West in 1967. There are over 7,300 power plants and almost 160,000 miles of high voltage lines.

US electric grid capacity and generation in 2021
Source Capacity
(GW)
Generation
(TWh)
Capacity
factor
Total 1,213 3,988 37%
Natural gas 559.3 1480.1 30%
Coal 228.0 892.3 45%
Nuclear 100.0 778.2 89%
Wind 133.5 377.9 32%
Hydro 80.0 245.3 35%
Solar 61.9 114.5 21%
Petroleum 32.5 18.3 6%
Biomass 14.1 26.7 22%
Geothermal 3.9 15.5 45%

Generation by state

Generation by state and source

The following figures offer detail into the sources of generation used in each state. Most often, natural gas is the largest source in a given state, with 22 states using it more than any other. Among renewable sources, 18 states use wind power more than any other.

Though not always the most prominent source, each state will use at least one source at a rate above the national average. Twelve states use nuclear power more than average, and California and Hawaii each use more solar and petroleum, respectively.

Texas contributes more to the grid than any other state, followed by Florida, Pennsylvania and California. On net, Pennsylvania exports the most power, while California imports the most.

Electric consumption

Home electrification

Electric grid consumption in the US was 3,806 TWh in 2021. Since 2010, total consumption has remained within 2% of this figure. Per capita consumption was 11.5 MWh in 2021, down 8% from its peak in 2007.

Residential customers used 39% of total electricity. Each month, the average customer used 886 kWh and paid $121 at an average rate of 13.7 cents/kWh. The commercial sector used 35% and industrial used 26%. Transportation used less than half of one percent.

System loss within the grid includes use in the generation process and transmission losses, as well as unaccounted loads. For 2021, this amounted to 203 TWh, or 5.3% of grid generation. Electricity used directly at the commercial or industrial level added 139 TWh, so total consumption was 3,945 TWh.

The northeastern US has long paid the highest electricity prices, while simultaneously using it the least per capita. California is an outlier in the west region; its neighbors tend to pay some of the lowest rates in the country, while California is second only to Hawaii and Alaska.

Arabization

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabization ...