The political economy of power

The generation and distribution of power (electricity) is politically and economically driven. It is also surrounded by deception and falsehoods. Tristen Taylor explains why and how.

For too long the issue of energy has been set aside, treated as if it had no influence on how South African society is shaped. And there has been a somewhat valid stereotype that within civil society, energy has been the domain of white environmentalists - aging hippies in sandals going shoo-wah over the teachings of the Dalai Lama and speaking about how we all must conserve electricity, how we all must make sacrifices, whilst black children die in shack fires caused from having to use a paraffin stove because the household electricity lifeline was used up weeks before.

The generation and distribution of power (primarily electricity) does not happen in a political vacuum; it cannot be divorced from the social and economic conditions under which most South Africans labour and starve. In fact, as I will attempt to explain, the generation and distribution of power is informed by social, economic and political realms.

The generation and distribution of energy is a murky topic. Omission, falsehood and deception surround the use of light switches, refrigerators, irrigation pumps and industrial smelters. Mis-information is pumping out faster and harder than a 'six-pack' power station spews out SO2 and CO2.

Who, then, is deceiving us? There are the usual suspects: coal mining companies, government, oil cartels, Eskom (power companies of South Africa), and other assorted free-market robber barons. There are also the traditional flag-carriers of the centrally planned economy. Then there is the environmental movement, which has traditionally refused to see beyond the forest to glimpse human misery and suffering. Without fail, the one lie that all of the above seem to propagate is that there is an energy shortage. It goes like this:

Since we can only generate x amount of power and the practical demand of each and every user is greater than x, x will have to be allocated. Of course, someone will have to make this allocation, and this someone is the state. The state, as a supposed neutral actor and invested with, to quote Max Weber, "a successful claim on monopoly of the legitimate use of force", will decide that industry will get so much power, agriculture so much, and residential users so much. The best allocation of resources will be on the basis of what is deemed in the best interest of the common good. It may be unfortunate that not all of us get the power we want, but that’s life and sacrifices have to be made.

This story is sly and deceiving. To start with, there is no energy shortage in the universe. The universe is awash with energy (all there is, after all, is energy and matter), and energy can neither be destroyed nor created. For the purposes of the human race, there is a virtual limitless amount of energy for the species to tap. And, therein lies the problem. It is not easy to convert energy into power, and part of the struggle of human history has been various attempts to tap into the energy of the universe. This has primarily been achieved through conversion of solar energy into plant and animal energy. This energy chain, like all energy chains, is never 100 per cent efficient. Each time energy is converted there is a certain amount of energy loss. Humans have then eaten plant and animal materials, converting these to human bio-chemical energy. Humans have then used that energy for labour to hunt more animals, grow more crops, build dwellings, and contest for resources - war and conflict. For most of history, the primary source of useable energy has been human muscle and intellect.

This was the case during the eras of the ancient Greek, Persian and Egyptian societies. It was certainly true during the Roman Empire. All these societies were based upon slave labour as the primary source of energy conversion. Since human beings were the most efficient sources of energy (human beings have the ability for rational thought; they can solve problems; are fairly durable; and can be taught to do things with greater efficiency than a cow or a horse), elite groups used slave labour to build, manufacture and grow the materials needed for those societies to function. The elite classes functioned as managers and grew rich from their exploitation of the labour of others.

Things began to change during the Middle Ages in Europe. During this time, while human power still remained supreme, animal power began to be used more and more frequently in agriculture; wood (plant energy) was beginning to be more and more important, especially in the production of iron and other metals; and water was used in mills for the production of flour, although, slightly later, windmills were used for this purpose. One notable consequence of this ‘new’ strategy of converting energy for human use was the complete and utter destruction of Europe’s forests. This led to what is called an energy crisis and forced European society into a potentially painful situation: find another source of power or undergo an economic collapse and a return to the dark ages. The ultimate solution was coal.

However, the most important lesson that should be learnt from this era, with regard to current energy conversion practices, was the political situation regarding water and windmills. But these two different energy sources were used in two different manners despite having the same primary technological function, grinding grain into flour (Debeir, Deléage, and Hémery). Watermills required access to flowing water and were relatively expensive to build. As the feudal structure of the day controlled access to watercourses and held a great deal of society’s capital, the aristocracy was able to own and control the watermills, thus, locking down an important part of agricultural production for its sole benefit. The peasantry had no access to the watermills, and had to compete in the processing of flour with older, less efficient methods of production. Quite clearly, we can see the link between ownership of energy conversion and socio-economic relationships. As Debeir has stated, "[water] mills were not only a good deal for some, but also tended to bolster an oppressive social structure".

Windmills were another story. Not only was wind part of the commons, and thus a renewable resource accessible to all social classes, it was cheaper to build windmills than watermills. The increasing use of windmills enabled the burghers, cities and peasantry to compete favourably in the production of flour, for which the market was growing as bread became more and more part of the general diet. Windmills also also encouraged competition with the aristocracy in the important realm of agricultural production. This began to have a significant impact in political relations, especially in the contest between free cities and feudal landowners, one of the central conflicts of the Middle Ages. Once again, Debier states:

"Thus windmills were established in the conditions of freedom that opened with the growth of cities, and established a further breach in the lords’ energy monopolies. Although feudal reaction against the new facilities persisted - "The windmill was the commoners’ mill which feudal law tried to take over" - it proved unable to stop the irresistible movement which continued until the dawn of the nineteenth century."

The dawn of the 19th century brought about a major technological, social and economic revolution: the industrial revolution. While the social, political and economic effects of the industrial revolution are well documented, the roles of new sources of energy conversion are often overlooked. Coal was at the heart of the industrial revolution. Basically, coal is plant matter that has decomposed, chemically altered, compressed and hardened over millions of years. Coal is made up of carbon, sulphur, methane, water and various other materials. Essentially, coal is the storage of chemical energy produced via long dead plant photosynthesis. Most of the coal used today was formed during the Carboniferous era (280 to 345 million years ago).

While the use of coal had been around for thousands of years, the industrial revolution mined and used coal to a degree never seen before. A new energy cycle was born with coal (and its offspring, steam), the fossil fuel cycle. Coal was used to drive steam engines, railways, furnaces (purified coal (coke) replaced wood as the primary source of heat for metallurgy), shipping and household heating. It provided such an intense and useful source of energy that the industrial revolution was entirely dependent on the mining, distribution, and burning of coal. It should come as no surprise that this valuable energy resource was not in the hands of the common people although it was they who died of Black Lung, but instead in the hands of the burgeoning, to borrow a phrase from Tom Wolfe, 'masters of the universe' - the capitalist class. While perhaps not of conscious design, there was no way that the windmill story (commoner power equivalent to that owned by the feudal lords) would be repeated with coal. Coal quickly became a privately owned commodity to be sold and traded as necessary, and fortunes were made. This, in turn, meant that the majority of the populace were precluded from control of the energy chain and that the power (both economic and political) of the newly formed capitalist class was further increased. The conflict between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat that has consumed human history since provides the basis of entire branches of philosophy, history and political analysis.

To highlight the point, the US was built on the private use of coal. It fuelled the beginnings of an industrial expansion that has lasted until today. Corporations have their origins in the rapid industrialisation brought about through the use of coal and the blood that was shed in producing it. As The Ukrainian Weekly points out:

"In the 19th century, America's industrialisation and dramatic economic development was fuelled, literally, by coal. Coal fuelled the expansion of the railroad into America's undeveloped western states, and in Pennsylvania it fuelled the mighty American steel industry. But extracting coal was dangerous work. Illness, injury and death were common. Several hundred coal miners a year died from methane gas explosions in the mines of the Pennsylvania anthracite region - the same type of explosion that recently killed the miners in Ukraine. Annually, tens of thousands of miners were maimed."

Coal has not disappeared from society as a valuable source of energy conversion. Quite the opposite. About 40 per cent of all electricity generated globally comes from coal-fired power stations with an efficiency of between 30 to 40 per cent; i.e. of one kilogramme of coal used in a power station, 300 grams is used to produce electricity and the remaining 700 grams produces waste heat. Coal is not only an important part of our power generation system, it remains, through its method of use, an important factor in how our societies are controlled and organised. The production and distribution of electricity in South Africa will be discussed later.

While coal remains an important part of the global energy cycle, another fossil fuel has eclipsed it: petroleum or crude oil, also called black gold. Petroleum became increasingly important in terms of the global energy chain throughout the 20th century, reaching a point where our economy is based entirely upon petroleum. About 84 per cent of petroleum extracted is refined into fuels (petrol, diesel, fuel oil, jet fuel, kerosene, and liquid petroleum gas (LPG)), the other 16 per cent is used in the manufacture of material, plastic being the most common. Like coal, petroleum is a finite fossil fuel comprised of decayed organic matter. Furthermore, petroleum is a cheap and effective source of energy.

To understand the extent to which we operate within a petroleum economy, take a look around you. The paper this is written on comes from trees cut down with machinery using petroleum; the wood is transported to the mills via trucks (petroleum again), from the mills to the stores, and from the stores to your office and home. Without petroleum, modern agriculture could not exist. There would be no cars or airplanes, no computers, no modern medicine, no electricity. There would be no plastic materials. There would be no modern economy. We would all be riding horses and to and from our subsistence farms. All of us who are alive now, owe that to the 20th century growth in population made possible by petroleum. Quite simply, if the supply of petroleum dried up tomorrow the world would enter a period of such utter economic collapse; the term 'apocalypse' could be considered an understatement. Many of us would starve to death within weeks.

The petroleum industry is vital to the life of every human being in the modern economy, and, yet, it is a tightly controlled industry with only a handful of key players divided amongst state and private control. Of the ten biggest corporations in the world (as ranked by Fortune 500), five are oil and gas companies with a combined annual revenue of US$$ 1.271 trillion. By way of comparison, South Africa’s Gross Domestic Product is US$215.5 billion. In the global market economy, this translates into an unequal balance of political power.

Not a great deal has changed in the petroleum market since 1900 when Standard Oil controlled 50 per cent of global sales.

Further, control over petroleum resources is vital not only for what is often termed the 'national interest', which actually means the interests of a thin elite class controlling any particular country, but for a country’s economic well-being. Anyone who thinks that America’s current military operations in the Middle East have nothing to with securing America’s long-term supply of petroleum is insane. A recent article in the (UK) Independent on a proposed law to allow multinational companies to drill Iraqi oil states:

"The US government has been involved in drawing up the law, a draft of which has been seen by The Independent on Sunday. It would give big oil companies such as BP, Shell and Exxon 30-year contracts to extract Iraqi crude oil, and allow the first large-scale operation of foreign oil interests in the country since the industry was nationalised in 1972."

Globally speaking, the energy cycle of modern life is dependent on petroleum, natural gas and coal. The global economy is a fossil fuel economy chasing after diminishing reserves with no alternative in mind. The control of this energy cycle is centralised in the hands of the few, with the majority of the world population reduced to mere consumers of energy, at best. Today, there are watermills everywhere and not a windmill in sight.

Part 2 will be published next week and Part 3 on 5th April

* Tristen Taylor is the Energy Policy Officer at Earthlife Africa Jhb. The views expressed in this work are not necessarily those of Earthlife Africa Jhb.

* Please send comments to or comment online at pambazuka.org