Houston analyst named energy and geopolitics chair at national think tank

moving up

Clay Seigle has joined the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Photo by Douglas Rissing. Courtesy of Getty Images.

Houston-based energy industry analyst Clay Seigle has joined the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) as a senior fellow and the James R. Schlesinger Chair for Energy and Geopolitics in the Energy Security and Climate Change (ESCC) Program.

“I’m honored to join CSIS as Senior Fellow and the James R. Schlesinger Chair for Energy and Geopolitics,” Seigle said in a news release. “In a time of unprecedented change in global energy markets, CSIS is uniquely positioned to advance policies that promote security, resilience, and innovation. I look forward to working alongside Joseph (Majkut, director of the Energy Security and Climate Change Program) and our outstanding colleagues to deliver impactful research and expand CSIS’s engagement with stakeholders in Washington and Houston.”

Seigle most recently served as director of Global Oil at Rapidan Energy Group, a D.C.-based independent energy analysis firm. At REG, he provided expert analysis on oil market forecasts and geopolitical scenarios to government and private sector stakeholders. He has also held leadership and analysis roles at organizations including Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA), the U.S. Department of Energy, Enron and others. He specializes in market intelligence, global energy security and political risk.

Seigle is a board member of the Houston Committee on Foreign Relations and chairs its Finance Committee. He is also a former vice president of the U.S. Association for Energy Economics. He holds a master’s degree in international relations (Middle East) and economics from Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies and a bachelor’s degree in government from the University of Texas at Austin.

The ESCC’s work has focused on developing diverse energy resources for the U.S. and providing leaders with insights on how to address challenges like climate change. According to CSIS, the ESCC program recently launched an Economic Security and Technology Department that aims to tackle topics like using artificial intelligence to maintain energy security.

“Our longstanding energy program is a centerpiece of our department’s work on the drivers of U.S. economic security in an era of technology competition,” Navin Girishankar, president of the CSIS Economic Security and Technology Department, said in a news release. “Clay’s deep understanding of energy markets and energy security will be an asset to CSIS leadership on these issues in the years to come. We are delighted that he is joining our team at a critical time for U.S. economic security policy.”

There's no silver bullet for clean energy. We need an all-hands-on-deck approach, writes Scott Nyquist. Photo via Getty Images

Houston expert: When it comes to the future of energy and climate, think 'all of the above'

guest column

People in the energy industry don’t have the Oscars. For us, the big event of the year is CERAWeek — a conference stuffed with CEOs, top policymakers, and environmental and energy wonks held annually in March.

CERAWeek 2022, with the theme“Pace of Change: Energy, Climate, and Innovation," meant the return of in-person activations, panels, and networking. Walking and talking between sessions and around the coffee table, it occurred to me that the unofficial theme of the event was “Maybe now we can find middle ground on energy.” This idea came up time and time again, from all kinds of people.

As with too many other issues, the discussion of the future of US energy has become polarized. On one end of the spectrum are those who want everything renewable and/or electrified by ….. last week, whatever the cost. Their mantra for fossil fuels: “Keep them in the ground.”

On the other end, are those who dismiss climate change, saying we can always adapt and that it doesn’t much matter, anyway. Just keep digging and drilling and mining as we have always done. And in the middle are the great majority of Americans who are not passionate either way, but want to be responsible consumers, and also to be able to visit grandma without breaking the bank.

I believe that the transition toward an energy system that is cleaner and less reliant on fossil fuels is realand will ultimately bring substantial benefits. At the same time, I believe that energy security and economics also matter. At a time when inflation was already running high, paying an average of $4.25 a gallon at the pump is piling pain on tens of millions of US households. Ultimately, over decades, the use of electric vehicles will reduce the need for oil and that lower-emissions sources, including renewables, will provide a larger share of the power supply, which today depends largely on gas and coal. But that moment is not now, or next week. Indeed, fossil fuels continue to account for almost 80 percent of US primary energy consumption, and a similar figure globally.

Here is one way to think about the interplay between the energy transition and energy security: “We need an energy strategy for the future—an all-of-the-above strategy for the 21st century that develops every source of American-made energy.” No, that isn’t some apologist for Big Oil; it was President Obama. In 2014, the Obama White House also noted the role of US domestic oil and gas production in enhancing economic resilience and reducing vulnerability to oil shocks. In short, the White House argued, US oil and gas production can bring real benefits for the country. I think that is still true.

Does that mean throwing in the towel on the energy transition and climate change? Absolutely not. There are a variety of ways to pursue the goal of reducing emissions and eventually getting to net-zero emissions. I’ve touched on many of them in previous posts—including reducing methane emissions,pricing carbon, hydrogen, renewables, electric vehicles, urban planning, carbon capture, and negative emissions technologies. In other words, an “all of the above strategy” makes sense in this regard, too.

I don’t know how, or if, a middle ground can be captured. But from what I heard at CERAWeek last year, from people of otherwise widely divergent views, there just may be momentum to get there. A middle-ground consensus rests on three premises. First, we need fossil fuels for energy security and reliability now and until the time when technologies are in place to secure the energy transition. Second, at the same time, we need to be investing in the energy transition because climate change is real and matters. And third, for sustained and systematic progress, government and industry need to work together.

Or, in a phrase, “all of the above.”

------

Scott Nyquist is a senior advisor at McKinsey & Company and vice chairman, Houston Energy Transition Initiative of the Greater Houston Partnership. The views expressed herein are Nyquist's own and not those of McKinsey & Company or of the Greater Houston Partnership. This article originally ran on LinkedIn.

Ad Placement 300x100

Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

Houston geothermal startup bumps Series B to $180M with Nabors investment

fresh funding

Houston-based geothermal startup Quaise Energy has closed its Series B fundraising round at $180 million after inking a significant investment from another local energy leader.

Quaise, which is developing a 50-megawatt superhot geothermal plant in Oregon, announced a "first close" of the round last month at $134 million, led by San Francisco-based investment firm Prelude Ventures. The $46 million bump has been fueled by a $35 million investment from Houston-based Nabors Industries.

The funding will go toward the continued development of the company's superhot geothermal plant, Project Obsidian, as well as the commercialization of Quaise's millimeter-wave drilling system, according to a news release.

“We are unlocking the most powerful clean energy source on Earth, and the Series B signals deep conviction across a wide range of investors,” Carlos Araque, Quaise CEO and president, said in the release. “Nabors is an invaluable partner as we move millimeter wave drilling to full commercial operations at Project Obsidian and beyond.”

Nabors, a repeat investor in Quaise, has also entered into a strategic framework agreement with Quaise. Under the agreement, Quaise will have access to a dedicated Nabors land rig and drilling platform. Nabors will also provide expertise in reservoir modeling, well design and drilling strategy.

Last year, Quaise drilled to a depth of about 330 feet using its millimeter-wave technology at its field site in Central Texas. Canary Media previously reported that Quaise plans to drill to nearly 3,300 feet later this year and to deploy its millimeter-wave technology at its power plant in 2027. The plant is expected to deliver power to the Pacific Northwest in 2030.

Quaise and Nabors say the partnership will improve drilling performance, reduce costs and accelerate project timelines.

“Superhot geothermal has the potential to make clean energy ubiquitous. That is why we are excited about our close relationship with Quaise,” Anthony Petrello, president and CEO of Nabors, added in the release. “Quaise’s millimeter wave technology changes the equation entirely by reaching superhot rock at temperatures and depths that are inaccessible with conventional drilling, transforming geothermal from a location-dependent resource into a global energy solution. Combined with Nabors’ drilling expertise and infrastructure, we see a path to gigawatt-scale geothermal power that no other company can offer today.”

Quaise reports that with the latest funding, it has now raised $280 million. It raised $21 million in a Series A1 financing round in 2024 and a $52 million Series A in 2022.

The company announced in March that it was aiming to raise $200 million for Project Obsidian through $100 million in Series B funding, plus an additional $100 million from grants, debt and project-level finance.

Houston's KBR tapped to provide tech for first SAF plant in Kazakhstan

clean deals

Houston-based engineering and technology firm KBR Inc. has been tapped to provide technology for Kazakhstan's first sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) production plant.

KazMunayGas-Aero LLP (KMG-Aero), a subsidiary of Kazakhstan’s national oil and gas company KazMunayGas, and KazFoodProducts awarded the contract to KBR for the project. The plant will use the alcohol-to-jet (AtJ) process for producing aviation fuel and aims to support President Kassym-Jomart Kemeluly Tokayev’s goal of boosting Kazakhstan's profile as a global aviation player, according to a news release from KBR.

"We are honored to support KMG-Aero and KFP in advancing the national commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, recognizing the pivotal role of aviation decarbonization in achieving these strategic objectives,” Jay Ibrahim, president of KBR Sustainable Technology Solutions, said in the release.

KBR will provide its PureSAF technology and engineering design for the project. Invented and developed by Swedish Biofuels AB, the PureSAF tech will be used to convert alcohol-based feedstocks into SAF. The PureSAF Technology can process multiple feedstocks—like bioethanol, syngas, carbon dioxide and hydrogen—and convert them to SAF, diesel and gasoline, according to KBR.

"KBR’s PureSAF is a feed-flexible, bankable technology that is designed to deliver high SAF yields and supports the project across the full lifecycle,” Ibrahim added in the release. “We look forward to closely collaborating and supporting the successful execution of this landmark SAF project.”

Earlier this summer, KBR was also chosen to provide technology for what’s expected to be Asia's first commercial-scale ethanol-to-jet (SAF) plant. The plant has a planned production capacity of up to 100,000 tons of SAF per year.

In addition to the SAF projects, KBR also announced this month that it has been selected by ORNX Green Hydrogen to provide proprietary ammonia technologies for a low-cost green ammonia project in Morocco.

The commitments come as KBR shifts its focus solely toward sustainability technology and services. The company is in the process of spinning off its Mission Technology Solutions business, which KBR recently announced will be named Trinzic. The remaining company, "New KBR," will serve the ammonia and syngas, chemical and petrochemicals, clean refining and circular economy markets.

Army to build nuclear microreactors at 5 U.S. bases, including Texas

Nuclear News

The U.S. Army announced Wednesday that it plans to add nuclear microreactors at five military bases from New York to Texas as a reliable source of energy independent of the commercial electric grid.

The announcement comes as the Trump administration pushes hard to develop the next generation of nuclear power, including billions in loans for large nuclear reactors to meet skyrocketing power demand from data centers and a pilot program to boost advanced reactor designs and projects for military and civilian use. No nuclear microreactors are supplying power to the commercial electric grid in the United States today.

Five companies selected by the Army will be awarded up to $2.2 billion in total over five years to own, construct and operate the microreactors, if they hit set milestones along the way for their performance. The Army expects that more than 20 nuclear microreactors will be built and operated.

Army and industry officials say microreactors offer a resilient power source for critical infrastructure at military installations in case the grid fails. Reactors can run for years without refueling.

Army Secretary Dan Driscoll said the awards will accelerate the military’s ability “to deliver safe, reliable baseload power directly to our installations. We are building the energy resilience necessary to project combat power globally, without relying on potentially vulnerable external grids,” he said.

The grants are part of the Army's “Janus Program” launched last year to deliver next-generation nuclear energy. Officials hope to push nuclear development forward so that advanced reactor designs move beyond experiments and prototypes to provide power for years to come. This will be the “spear tip,” said Jeff Waksman, principal deputy assistant secretary of the Army for installations, energy and environment.

“That is the transition that we are trying to effect here,” he said on a call with reporters Wednesday. “These are not meant to be Army-specific designs.”

Critics of building more nuclear reactors say they’re too expensive and riskier than other energy sources. The Army program is using the military's “deep pockets to provide a hidden subsidy” to nuclear companies that can't find private-sector customers for their hypothetical and uneconomical reactors, said Alan J. Kuperman, associate professor at the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin and coordinator of the Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Project.

The reactors will be licensed by the Army, rather than the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which licenses commercial nuclear reactors. Kuperman said it's “a dangerous scam on many levels.”

Waksman said these reactors will shut down safely in case of a failure, they're small and the Army wouldn't add them to installations without being certain they are safe. He said the Army is working on a deal with the Energy Department to remove radioactive waste, and there won't be any long-term storage on these installations.

The Army is working to align its regulatory processes as much as possible, Waksman said, so that companies won’t need major changes to their designs to be later licensed by the NRC. Along with federal funding, the Army expects billions of dollars in private capital investment.

Army leads the military’s adoption of nuclear energy

President Donald Trump signed executive orders in May 2025 to speed up the development of nuclear power. The Army was tasked with ensuring that an advanced reactor would start operating at a domestic military installation no later than Sept. 30, 2028. The Janus program is named for the ancient Roman god of transitions.

Officials know that delivering nuclear power to a military base will be a challenge, so they picked five companies in case one or more fail, Waksman said. The selected companies are: Antares Nuclear at Fort Bragg in North Carolina; BWXT at Fort Campbell in Kentucky; General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems at Fort Hood in Texas; Radiant Industries at Fort Benning in Georgia; and Westinghouse Government Services at Fort Drum in New York.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer asked the Army to select Fort Drum. The critical missions Fort Drum supports require secure power generation, the New York Democrat said.

The military installations will remain connected to the grid. The reactors would not completely power them. Each reactor will provide between 1 megawatt to 20 megawatts of power, depending on the company's design. Major bases use as much power as a small city. Antares and Radiant are planning to deliver their reactors in three-packs, Waksman said.

The Army now uses diesel as a primary backup for critical infrastructure. But in a conflict, Waksman said, the Army may not be able to move fossil fuels easily wherever it needs them.

“That makes nuclear energy just a natural game changer,” he said. “It makes sense for the Army to take the lead here.”

A reactor at Fort Belvoir in Virginia, completed in 1957, was the first nuclear power reactor to provide electricity to a commercial power grid in the United States for an extended period, according to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Companies say this will accelerate US nuclear development

California-based Antares reached a crucial milestone under the U.S. pilot program that could allow it to produce electricity at Idaho National Lab next year. The company said the Army's announcement extends its momentum. Westinghouse Government Services said it’s proud to support the Army’s efforts to strengthen energy security and innovate.

Tori Shivanandan, president and chief operating officer of California-based Radiant, said the Army’s $750 million award “shows confidence in Radiant’s product and ability to manufacture, deploy and safely operate nuclear microreactors for the American military.” The Janus program “will build a stronger and more resilient America,” she said.

General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems said its reactor is designed to operate in remote, off-grid and extreme environments for 40 years. It said it will draw on more than 70 years of nuclear expertise to provide safe, dependable and independent power for the military.

Rex Geveden, BWXT's president and chief executive officer, said, “As we commence work on the Janus program, we are delivering the nation’s most credible and reliable path to deployable nuclear power.”

View All Listings

ENERGYCAPITALHTX EMAILS ARE AWESOME