From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

The Greenies are throwing their toys out of the pram because Texas is planning to build dozens of new gas power stations.

Power Magazine reports:

A nonprofit environmental group said at least 130 natural gas-fired power plant projects are planned in Texas over the next few years as part of that state’s effort to meet growing demand for energy. The Washington, D.C.-based Environmental Integrity Project (EIP), in a report published June 11, said the projects would provide more than 58 GW of new generation capacity, while noting that many of the proposed facilities may not move beyond the planning stage.

The group noted the build-out is supported by the Texas Energy Fund, a taxpayer-supported program created by state lawmakers that provides grants and loans for construction of power generation projects. The fund was created in the wake of the February 2021 Uri winter storm, when as estimated 10 million Texans lost power, prompting officials to look at how to avoid future blackouts caused by extreme weather or other events.

The group in its report said it “has created a statewide inventory of proposed gas power plant projects … using information from a wide variety of publicly available sources, including the Energy Information Administration, Global Energy Monitor, ERCOT [Electrical Reliability Council of Texas, the state’s grid manager], application documents for the Texas Energy Fund, permit documents from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, trade publications, and news articles.” The report focused not only on the construction of new gas-fired projects, but also on the environmental impact, saying the new facilities would, if built, emit an estimated 115 million tons of greenhouse gases (GHG).

Full story here.

How dare Texas want reliable power!

A 5.1- to 5.5-magnitude earthquake near the Fordow nuclear enrichment facility in Qom Province on June 20, 2025 has created a lot of speculation and worry. The earthquake in question, which occurred near Iran’s Fordow nuclear facility, was reported with varying magnitudes (5.1 to 5.5) across news sources. Based on available information from news reports, seismic data, and expert analyses, here’s an assessment of the likelihood that this event was related to nuclear weapons testing or a nuclear accident:

Analysis of Likelihood: Nuclear Weapons Test or Nuclear Accident?

1. Nuclear Weapons Test

The likelihood of the earthquake being caused by a nuclear weapons test is very low based on available evidence. Here’s why:

• Seismic Characteristics: Nuclear tests typically produce seismic signatures distinct from natural earthquakes, with a sharp onset and a lower depth (often less than 1–2 km for tests). The reported earthquake had a depth of 10 km, which is too deep for a typical nuclear test. Experts on X have noted that a 10 km depth is inconsistent with nuclear test signatures.
• Magnitude: A 5.1–5.5 magnitude is within the range of a small nuclear test (e.g., North Korea’s 2006 test was ~4.3), but natural earthquakes of this size are common in Iran, a seismically active region. A similar event in October 2024 was investigated and confirmed as a natural earthquake, not a test.
• Lack of Official Evidence: No credible reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), or other monitoring agencies suggest a nuclear test. Iranian media acknowledged the quake but didn’t mention tests, and unverified claims (e.g., on Telegram or X) lack substantiation.
• Geopolitical Context: Iran’s nuclear program is under intense scrutiny, and a test would likely trigger detectable radiation or international condemnation. U.S. intelligence assesses Iran hasn’t decided to build a bomb, though it has enriched uranium close to weapons-grade. A test now would be a major escalation, inconsistent with Iran’s cautious approach.
• Speculation on X: Some X posts speculated about a test, citing the quake’s proximity to Semnan (home to missile facilities) or Fordow. However, these claims are inconclusive, often based on unverified sources or misinterpretations of seismic data.

2. Nuclear Accident

The likelihood of a nuclear accident causing the earthquake is extremely low. Here’s the reasoning:

• Nature of Accidents: Nuclear accidents (e.g., reactor meltdowns or explosions) don’t typically generate seismic events of this magnitude. They might cause localized damage or radiation leaks, but no reports indicate such an incident.
• Fordow’s Design: The Fordow facility is an underground uranium enrichment site, not a reactor or weapons assembly plant. It’s hardened against attacks and buried deep in a mountain, reducing the chance of an accident causing a 5.1–5.5 quake.
• No Radiation Reports: An accident would likely release detectable radiation, which would be picked up by global monitoring networks. No such reports exist from the IAEA or other sources.
• Context of Israeli Strikes: The quake occurred amid Israeli airstrikes on Iranian military and nuclear sites, raising fears of damage to Fordow. However, the IAEA reports no significant damage to Fordow from recent strikes, and the quake’s timing appears coincidental.

3. Natural Earthquake

The most likely explanation is a natural earthquake. Iran is on several tectonic fault lines, and earthquakes of this magnitude are frequent. The USGS and Iranian authorities reported the event as a natural quake, with no evidence suggesting otherwise.

4. Other Considerations

• Unverified Claims: A Telegram post by an Iranian blogger and some X users suggested Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) “testing” caused the quake. These claims are unverified and lack supporting evidence from credible sources.
• Regional Tensions: The quake’s proximity to Fordow and the timing of Israeli strikes fueled speculation. However, similar rumors about a quake in October 2024 were debunked, suggesting a pattern of overinterpretation.
• Seismic Monitoring: Global seismic networks are designed to detect nuclear tests, and no alerts have been raised. The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO) would likely flag suspicious activity, but no such reports exist.

Conclusion

• Nuclear Weapons Test: <5% likelihood. The depth, regional seismicity, lack of radiation, and absence of official confirmation make a test highly improbable. Speculation on X and Telegram is not credible without corroboration.
• Nuclear Accident: <1% likelihood. No evidence supports an accident, and Fordow’s design and function make this scenario implausible.
• Natural Earthquake: >95% likelihood. The seismic characteristics and Iran’s tectonic setting strongly favor a natural event.