The Power of Demand Elasticity in Unraveling Energy Investment Opportunities in the Dark World
But will these truths hold in at least one part of the face of the earth where:
- a. Public utility failure is celebrated?
- b. The national power regulatory authority like any government organ is soaked in corruption and currently facing corruption charges in the court of law?
- c. Government investment produces no result? In the words of Don Hirschberg, instead of producing 160 power plants for about US$160 billion spent from 1999 to 2010 Nigeria perhaps produced 160 billionaires as there is nothing to show for the amount spent.
- d. The major power company in the land -- Power Holding Company of Nigeria -- is a vertically structured public monopoly draining government scarce resources year-in-year out since it came to prominence by 1972?
- e. Seven organs are statutorily mandated to play roles that brew functional duplications and germinate friction, wrestling for dominance to the destruction of the energy industry continually?
- f. The country is launching demand data for the first time in its about 50-years life meaning, the government does not even know who wants electricity? What quantity? What supply structure? What price? What technology to be used? Simply, the government is just waking up from slumber or has just realized they have not found the route to realistic power generation capacity.
There are so many questions to ask all convincingly pointing to the inevitable mould for deregulation. But as the article is not about digging the rot in the country's power regime or refuting my Professor's new lecture notes, I will rather delve into to the main research issue -- the potency of demand elasticity in discovering investment opportunities in countries like Nigeria.
The Nigerian Energy Situation
Using 2008 figures from IEA, I tabulate below the complete Nigerian energy accounting framework in its generic three phases -- primary energy requirement (supply), Net Supply available (Conversion) and Final energy or Net domestic consumption (Demand). This is to enable us derive a complete accounting of energy flows from original source of each commodity passing through conversion processes to end-use demands, avoiding every whit of double counting and without omitting nothing . Our emphases are on the Nigerian electricity commodity situation and its demand determinants.
The choice of 2008 data is deliberate even though present figures would have helped to buttress my argument as they are worst. This is because I can adequately explain factors responsible for the 2008 energy outcome but the present day result is being influenced by factors still under study.
Right from start we are confronted with a total primary energy supply situation which is practically dominated by combustible biomass.
Measured in thousand tons of oil equivalents (ktoe) on a net calorific value basis, the graph below shows that out of the 101,313 ktoe Net Supply Available for Nigeria in 2008 energy basket, the bulk of it comprising 86.76% was wood, animal dung and other combustible biomass. Petroleum products (60% of it imported) comprised 10.14% while electricity occupies a lamentable 1.57%!
This extensive prevalence of wood and animal dung in this country's energy basket gives the irrefutable fact that Nigeria is purely an electricity deficient country in terms of supply.
In that 2008, Nigeria produced one of the world poorest output (18,517 GWh) electricity for a population in excess of 150 million people. In the same period, Nigeria's contemporary (in terms of geopolitics) South Africa with a population less than 1/3 of Nigeria produced 258,291 GWh that is more than 1,395%. Sadly, while South Africa is increasing its production capacity, Nigerian production capacity is oscillating between 14,000 and 19,000 GWh. Just in May last year, South Africa secured a World Bank loan of US$3.75 billion to turn its vast Bituminous Anthracite into additional power provision capacity. In the same May, Nigeria was busy rigging elective posts, while sitting on 187 Tcf of proven sweet and zero sulphur content gas reserves and vast amount of good quality coal and abundant sunshine.
The most worrisome picture comes from the demand side - the main thesis of this research article pictured below. Of the 11,168 ktoe consumed by industry, 8,897 comprised combustibles! Going by these IEA facts and figures, we see an economic system where its industries are being run by wood, animal dung, and human energy.
Table III: Final Energy Consumption by Nigerian Industries in 2008
The facts on ground are that professional craft-men, artisans, tradesmen, in the mass pool of carpentry/upholstery, finishing works in construction, etc use manual hammer, chisels, saws and every tool that should be power-driven for their works. The power drills, circular saws, finishing sanders, angle grinders, impact wrenches, scruguns, and other power-driven professional tools in use in this type of segment in the US, Europe and so on from Black & Decker, Makita, Bosch and Hitachi are not common in the Nigerian industry segment because of lack of power.
In the commercial and Public Services segment, there is no alternative to electricity commodity. For a sector like this with tens of thousands of office buildings all over the country, using IT, telecoms, computer systems, all manner of modern office equipment in a country with more than 150 million would certainly require electricity in tens of thousands of kloe far in excess of the paltry 393 available.
Transportation's entire final demand figure of 8,772 came from petroleum, while 98% of energy used by residential was combustible and this is not surprising since the main electricity-dependant sector (industry) has to depend almost wholly on biomass for its energy supply also. In forestry, there is a bit of fossil fuel instruments in use for wood felling to some extent but not in sufficient quantity.
Agriculture/fishery which occupies a significant portion of the country's GDP and the largest employer of labour presently is entirely driven by human energy. However, the government has launched an ambitious US$2.67 billion agro-enterprise scheme. This will certainly require power in all of its value chain.
The chronic scarcity of electricity in the Nigeria is conspicuous. The need for electric power in the country's entire economic life is also striking and government judging from the aforementioned cannot satisfy this need. Therefore, this presents investment opportunity to power merchants all over.
Elasticity of Electric Commodity Demand in Nigeria
To what extent do consumers react to changes in the quantity of a commodity they buy and what factor(s) is/are more influential in this reaction to me is a necessary and basic condition for serious business planning. Profit is a function of total revenue less total cost and total revenue is the total aggregate market demand at a price. What makes an individual therefore to reduce or increase demand for a commodity should be at the core package of investment estimation and if it is, the surer the realization of expected outcomes is. The necessity of this summation is the truism that the consumer behaviour ultimate determines the level of profit.
This responsiveness to market stimulants as we all know from high school is the demand elasticity of that commodity. What keeps a business running, ensures the receipt of planned cash-inflows and sustains profitability is the degree of the immunity the commodity commands in the market over these stimulants whenever and wherever they surface.
Demand for electricity being a derived demand has determinants differing in degree and content from the broad determinants of demand for other commodities/services.
The strength of demand elasticity is highly connected to the use for which the commodity is needed for and its stock level at time of need. The paradox of essentiality of air at zero value is explained by the stock availability in that it is sufficient and abundant everywhere.
In the dark world, the electricity demand structure is not significantly different from the standard structure consisting of Industry, Agriculture, Fishery, Transport, Residential, Commercial, Public Services and a logical rounding up others. Each segment differs to some extent and substance from one another, though they share some common factors.
Weather can exact great influence on demand for electricity in the absent of gas for space heating in cold zones and around winter making it almost a necessity resulting to an inelastic demand by households. The degree of this strong elasticity is relaxed in hot and humid climes like Nigeria. So then one would expect some degree of response to price changes by the Nigerian residential consumer.
Surprisingly, a result of a conjoint analysis reveals that the urban Nigerian residential elasticity of demand is completely inelastic at price five times the current average offer price of US$88.00/MWh.
The industry, Commerce and Public Sector segments also share the same elasticity structure, scarcity being very visible in the factors responsible for this structure. While the motive power need for the industrial segment is also a strong influencer contributing extensively to the inelastic structure of the demand for electric commodity in the industry sub-sector, lightening and power needs for space and office equipment use contribute considerably in shaping the elasticity of the commerce and public services segments. These result to the understated diagrams.
Elasticity of Electricity Demand in Nigeria measured in US$/MWh
Although there was a slight response to income change in the residential sector, the acute scarcity and the cost of self generation offset the price and income in the observed response.
The summation of these individual segments' demand elasticity results to an aggregate national electricity demand elasticity that is perfectly inelastic even at price increase of about 420%. The price range between US$88 and US$440/MWh therefore provides a planning zone for prospective investors' investment consideration.
It is pertinent to mention that during the computations of each consumer's segment elasticity, I used the arc elasticity mathematical formula on my data.
Does this mean Nigeria sleeps in darkness?
The impression the reader is likely to get from the IEA statistics presented above will be that Nigeria completely sleeps in darkness as it is completely biomass dependent. At critical times, Nigerians are compelled to use different self electricity generation methodologies ranging from very small generating sets of 1.5 kva to large industrial generators, a necessary behaviour that hurts some fundamental economic variables of the country.
A privilege document reveals that Nigeria imports about 2.4 billion litres of diesel and petroleum fuel, spending about US$2.0 billion scarce foreign exchange and congesting its tight roads with over 1,000 tanker trucks to serve these self electricity generating activities annually.
The average cost of electricity supply from these compulsory activities which is estimated at about US$1,400 presently provides an absorptive capacity to high electricity commodity prices, responsible for the inelastic structure of the demand for the commodity. From economies of scale alone, prospective investors can provide electricity far cheaper than what is obtainable and still go home with great fortunes.
Where is the Profit?
The 2010 IEA projected levelized cost of electricity production for two relevant fuel technologies in Nigeria for the production of 1MWh are; (1) gas US$92.11/MWh and (2) coal US$89.95. For no special reason, I add a reckless O&M, transmission, distribution and sales collection cost of 1.5 times the cost of the LCOE to derive a total cost of US$138.17/MWh for a prospective gas-fired plant and US$134.93/MWh for a prospective Coal-fired plant with Carbon Capture technology. What an amazing gold mine, when compared to offer price as high as US$440/MWh!
In 2008 we conceived a US$386 million investment in a 20-year fuel-fired power plant with an average annual capacity of 615,086MWh and 18% projected power loses. An average combine market price of US$92/MWh was used. The result of the financial model I did revealed an NPV of US$462 million, Internal Rate of Return of 19.19%, Equity Rate of Return of 22.28% Pay Back Period of 6.9years!
The economic viability of power business in Nigeria is therefore not in doubt.
What About the Government Factor?
I am yet to find any optimist even within the very government circle handling the electricity generation projects that will confirm to me or anyone that there will be light in the nearest future from on-going efforts if left solely to government. Contrary to general believe on corruption being the main obstacle to successful power provision by Nigerian government, nepotism plays more devastating role in crippling every good intension.
Nepotism permeates the entire public sphere of Nigeria, favouring the use of mediocrity and misfits in a critical venture such as this rather than engagement of the few but effective professionals available and this trend is growing foreclosing perpetually and effectively the entrants of professionals through the public door. This is one primary reason why the government cannot deliver.
However, unknown to the outside world is the genuine and strong aspirations of the Nigerian government to create a sufficient and sustainable electricity capacity and its unquestionable readiness to aid in any ways private persons or institutions that are willing to venture into this fertile industry.
Therefore, such qualitative electricity supply regulatory risks are comparatively less severe now.
To attract investment into this sector, the Nigerian government is putting instruments directly aiming at reducing the cost of capital and putting a risk management enterprise to manage uncertainty. Such instruments include the creation of a bulk trader for effective Power Purchase Agreement, Guarantees and establishment of a gas-to-power dedicated parastatal to ensure not only the sufficient supply of gas to the power sector, but at a cheap price.
If the chairman of my credit committee then should ask me again as he used to whenever I present a credit proposal for corporate lending, if I can invest my money in the Nigerian power sector, my answer will remain the same yes and yes and yes.
Comments
Neither do the ladies and gentlemen making the teaching decisions at Swedish universities. They are worse than hopeless. But the students are good. They have been taught how to add and subtract and read English, and read important books, and not to panic when they see mathematics on the blackboard, and they have been taught well. Unless I am mistaken, the governments and people and parents and voters in many Third World countries do not have much time left to get their game together. And Len, you can't imagine the kind of mess that is coming to some countries in twenty or thirty years-
http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000051669
may be too optimistic if New Your Times reporter Ian Urbina is correct?
http://www.prosefights.org/nmgco/nmgco.htm#homan1
No response to the above email to Ms Homan so far.
Recently I tried to determine how many sub Saharan countries there are. I found a list of 50 (not from African sources) but noticed South Sudan was not on the list. So I decided to accept 51 sub-Saharan countries. Why should we be puzzled about them lacking electricity? When I as a child was looking at the National Geographic Magazine every issue seemed to reveal another erstwhile unknown African spear carrying tribe.
As far as I know none of these countries has ever invented anything nearly as advanced as the bicycle.
Expecting these people jumping to multi- hundreds of million dollar generating plants and distribution systems is insane and unfair. The problem is far greater. The Nigerians (and other sub-Saharans) are not very bright. National IQ estimated in 2002 was 67 and in 2006 were 69. People with such low IQ’s profit little from formal education and can not aspired to being competitive in engineering, economics, hard science, law, CPA, etc.
Then there is the problem of behavior. I don’t know the crime statistics for Nigeria in particular but I do know it is egregious for sub-Saharan Africa. And South Africa is frequently held up as the model. Despite a couple centuries of influence by the Dutch and English they are nothing to emulate today. I find gang rape of children walking home from school rather than an outrage dismayingly common
You say that people with low IQs profit little from formal education. You've got that right, Mister, and so the thing to do is to start by raising those IQs. They say that this cant be done, but on the basis of the time I spent in the barracks I don't have to believe that. Of course, it cant be done overnight, and some of the precious freedom of school children will have to be taken from them, and teachers will have to work harder, but...
The Koreans pretty much give the lie to those who would raise IQ’s. They have suffered almost continually under very severe foreign overlords, have not been well fed or well educated. Further in resent times, since 1945, North Korean have had continued bad treatment, yet they test as well as South Koreans who have had it very much better.
Averages are tricky things. On average I have been dead for some time. I should not expect to wade across a river that has an average depth of 2 feet. If the data plotted up to a nice bell curve with a single well defined peak and symmetrical tails we could reach all kinds of very accurate conclusions and predictions. The Indians are many people. As the national average IQ is only 85 yet we know there are many brilliant Indian. Premiere astronomers and mathematicians. If I blighthy use a standard deviation of 15 for IQ, For India and sub Saharan Africa bight people would be rarer than experienced. The standard deviation has to be greater else we would find almost no individuals with High IQ’s. But it turns out the assumptions I have been using for homogeneous populations with about an average IQ of 100 and a standard deviation of 15 is not what we find in India or Sub Saharan Africa. We are quite sure of the national average IQ numbers, it is the std. dev.that has to be adjusted. To retain the average IQ numbers yet allow for more people to have high I”Q’s we need to increase the value of the Std. dev. For low IQ populations. By increasing the std. dev to 20 we get results that comport with reality without affecting the national IQ data.
For a homogeneous population of average IQ of 100 a 15 Std. dev works well. Three std. dev on each side of 100 should include almost everyone – and it does. 100 +/- 3x15 = 55 to 145, with most between 85 and 115..
It is interesting the US armed forces currently require an enlistee to have an AFQT score equivalent to an !Q of about 92 and a HS diploma. No one talks about it but since the average American Black has an IQ of 85 fewer than half qualify mentally. In my war (Korean War) the so-called combat branches (Infantry, Armor and Artillery) would not even accept low IQ inductees into their basic training or would wash them out and be send them to driving school, cook and baker school, the Quartermasters, or become warehousemen, etc.
Anyway.....
It sounds like a more distributed energy system might work better in Nigeria, even if the nominal costs might be higher; in practical terms, it might be much lower.
Lots of 3rd world markets have moved straight to cell-phones vs. landlines. Similar sensibilities might be in place here.
Just what “some boundary” is that, Jim? Is it your boundary between Political Correctness (that presents not a scintilla of data that I know of) versus a mountain of real data that makes you uncomfortable? Sure it is uncomfortable and unjust and unfair. But that does not make it wrong. Comfort is not an issue.
“All men are created equal” I think was the dumbest thing Thomas Jefferson wrote. (Alibi, he was a politician after all and just maybe he had to say it.)
Clearly we hominids who developed over eons thousands of miles apart could not be expected to arrive today with identical characterizes. More like expecting a flipped coin to land repeatedly on edge. If we were talking about a running quotient rather than an intelligence quotient Africans would rate highest for long distances and American Blacks for short distances.
You rolled a live grenade into the room with no more explanation than a flippant “anyway…”
However, thanks to a burst of patriotism - caused by my being fired for INCOMPETENCE from my engineering job in LA - I went back into the army at the close of the Korean war, with the intention of returning to my old regiment. What happened was that the first basic company I was in was a company in which at least half of the men had some college, and there were a half dozen persons with graduate training. After 8 weeks, three or four of us went to the REAL army for advanced infantry training, and there is was clear that anybody with a heartbeat was welcome to the party. Race and IQ had no part of it. Of course, I wasn't made to feel so welcome because I was expelled from infantry leadership school on the last day of the course. I dont know what I did wrong, but it must have been something.
What am I saying is that Uncle Sam is flexible where his fighting forces are concerned. In WW2, when the Germans attacked in the Ardennes, the best divisions in the US army accepted black volunteers, and they didn't waste any time sending them to the front, or resegregating them after the war. As you probably know, when racial integration took place in Korea, high ranking officers who had said that they would never accept integration changed their tune.
I accept that genetics are important, but so is culture. As for IQ I did pretty good on a couple of tests, but even so was expelled from engineering school after my first year as COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY HOPELESS, in the words of the Dean of Engineering. I guess that I was culturally off base.
The boundary is tagging the various races with IQ values. No, I'm not being Politically Correct (PC), but perhaps I am being Practically Correct (hmm...also PC). I'm aware of the studies, and I don't dispute the overall findings (e.g., "The Bell Jar"). For reference, I am a Caucasian, which means I supposed to be on average about 5-10 IQ points below Asians, and 5-10 points above blacks. Whatever.
As you have pointed out, there is quite a standard deviation. Also, how much different does 5-10 points mean anyway? Probably not that much. I'm involved with the software industry, and was a common rumor (used to be, anyway) that people living in Japan could not code very well. So perhaps intelligence has many dimensions. I think the rigor imposed at a very early age in simply learning an Ideographic language could have a HUGE impact in possible IQ testing.
Again, whatever.
The real point I'm trying to make is quibbling about 5 or so IQ points (even if technically correct) is not worth divisive, ill will it can often provoke. In a PRACTICAL sense, it's just not worth it. Also, it is clear to me that the limited access to nutrition and education due to poverty impact IQ far more than the racial component.
On a larger note, I will comment that our society is being further driven by intelligence factors. Basically, you have to be pretty smart just to have a decent job in the U.S. these days. That's because it's proven cost-effective to out-source many middle class jobs overseas. And like 'em or hate 'em, you have to be pretty bright to be a Wall St. trader as well.
So, without dragging some odd racial profiling into this discussion, there is the notion that more factors in our society are driven by processes requiring fewer (but brighter) people. That's a concern, because I do agree there are a limited number of bright/dedicated/hardworking people.
Also, FWIW, it is clear that Mr. Williams wrote an excellent paper and provided a detailed analysis for what's going on in Nigeria; far better than I could have done.
I think it did everyone a disservice that race was brought up at all.
Jim, this is as misplaced as supposing Kanya Williams having an average Nigerian IQ of 70. Kanya surely is bright, as anyone writing such an article would have to be. And Jim, you are sandbagging us. You know darn well you are bright, so cut it out. I just reread your last comment and find it loaded with criticisms of things I did not say. It’s called setting up and knocking over straw men. And you ask me again things I thought I had quite effectively answered.
Among all the other handicaps Nigeria faces I mentioned low AVERAGE IQ. It is a fact and it is a handicap.
Put up GOOD VALID RESEARCH of can it.
“Neither the existence nor the size of race differences in IQ are a matter of dispute, only their cause," write the authors.
"The Black-White difference has been found consistently from the time of the massive World War I Army testing of 90 years ago to a massive study of over 6 million corporate, military, and higher-education test-takers in 2001.”
“Racial Admixture Studies. Black children with lighter skin, for example, average higher IQ scores. In South Africa, the IQ of the mixed-race "Colored" population averages 85, intermediate to the African 70 and White 100.”
I have copied two sentences above that report the same numbers I have been using and seen in other places. I had not seen the SA numbers on White-Black mixtures before. We see the same result (85) unchanged in the US. for 100 years.
There have been both supportive comments and critical comments by academics. To assess the critical comments one has to keep in mind that the subject of the article is not the size of the IQ differences but to apportion the CAUSE(S) between genes and everything else.
There are a large number of sites where some maintain there cannot be racial differences to those who say we cannot even measure IQ, or dismiss the whole idea - some quite extreme..
You'll need to do better than that. I requested AUTHOURITATIVE references.
Statement: Men are stronger than women. Maybe you will give me an example of sufficient authoritative research data supporting, or negating the statement. Don’t bother with filtered information such as athlete data, or data adjusted for weight or age or training, etc.
And of course I don’t expect your data to cover millions of tests in a hundred countries over a 100 year period as does the IQ data I use.
ps The site i referenced worked fine on BING and had some interesting stuff.
Your requirement to avoid data adjusted for weight is incomprehensible. It is like asking for an authoritative reference that typical agricultural tractors have greater pulling power than lawn tractors, no weight adjustments allowed. A false criterion.
Given your inability to provide any credible reference, simply opinion, I declare your position to be the UTTER NONSENSE personal opinion I suspected.
And my lawn tractor can pull a bigger load through a 4 foot gate than your large tractor.
The authors you are citing are J. Philippe Rushton and Arthur R. Jensen. According to wikipedia, Rushton is the current president of the Pioneer Fund, and has been since 2002. The Southern Poverty Law Center characterizes the Pioneer Fund as a "Hate Group".
I would love to be Nigeria’s power minister I would buy a Fleet of GE LM6000’s (42 MW) or similar small generators. If brought in quantity I believe they could beat $500/KW installed. A billion dollars could put 2000MW on the ground at 50 different locations. They would still need gas pipes and power grids but 25 or so small local grids in populated areas near oil fields should be much cheaper than trying to get the output from a hand full of large stations distributed over the country. The LM6000’s are fairly efficient simple cycle units with heat rates around 9300btu/kwh. The engines are also light weighing in around 18,000 lbs can be shipped by a medium sized truck. A good crew can remove and install another engine in 16 hours. This allows for Depot repairs in countries with adequate facilities. My suggestion is move from consultants to steel on the ground. A fleet of gifted engineers would not be needed. A competent person or two per site and group of local strong backs should be able to maintain then.
I am sure with my limited understanding that this is a simple strategy to solve a much more complex problem. My guess is billions of dollars and another decade or so will go to consultants to create grandiose solutions that will prove unaffordable and impractical, the region will remain an area of poverty until the oil runs out, then things will much worse.
The solid state electronics discoverers at Bell Labs nor the DNA guys could have passed muster with the SPLA. Yet we accept the transistor and DNA even without Dees’ blessing.
In resent years I have lost a great deal of my previous respect for academia. I suspect that is at least part of this loss of respect is due to the dependence on government grants. Almost utter dependence. Venal dependence. Professors will not speak ill of those who feed them. They tend to not speak at all about facts.
Two examples. For decades academic geologists (those who write the textbooks and head the learned societies) squelched plate tectonics. Students who supported plate tecrtonics were denied geology degrees or admission to graduate programs. And the cause of the dinosaur die-off. An impact crater.
Remember just a few years ago when the Duke University la Cross team was accused of gang raping an exotic dancer hired for their amusement? Now Duke is a premier school – at least by how expensive and restrictive it is. Almost all the liberal arts faculty joined in the defense of the girl. Without a shred of evidence except that she was Black and the team was mainly rich white kids. And innocent. Having a PhD at a prestigious school does not make one a pre-trial expert but likely a fool.
I agree with much of the latter part of your note. Case in point is how theoretical physics is now dominated by string theorists, even though there is no evidence to back up the premise. In the long run, these things tend to straighten themselves out. I suppose acting conservative is not the worst thing (though I don't find string theory particularly conservative; more like mathematical busy-work because they are simply stuck.....)
By 1990 we were using 4677 Mt/ year of total coal, and 3493Mt/year of hard coal. By 2010 these rates had increased to 7229 and 6185 respectively. Since the Kyoto base year of 1990 total coal usage has gone up 55% and hard coal usage 77% in a mere twenty years. I wonder if there has ever been a period in history which witnessed such a large increase.
Wasn’t the Kyoto Protocol to recognize the problem and attack it?
I was born into a world of fewer than 2 billion people. Today we are 7 billion and just today the UN says we will double to 15 billion within the century. (There is no way to get there.) But I never knew as a child a day without very reliable electric service nor did I ever experience a long outage.
Today the world, the US and Germany all get about the same percentage of their electricity from coal (maybe 41 to 44%). But the Germans don’t amount to much (in this problem). 80 x 10^6 / 7 x 10^9 = 0.0114. Or about 1% of people. Ergo, the problem does not pivot on Germany.
What is all this I hear every day about emerging people? Didn’t the Egyptians emerge 4000 years ago when my ancestors were wearing animal skins and never had a bath?
When I was a child some flat earthers still existed. I remember Zion Illinois where there were true believers. Considered freak then as by nearly everyone
I will not chase down every objection you have raised. As Carl Sagan once said, “the burden of proof lies with those making extra ordinary claims.
When I was a child some flat earthers still existed. I remember Zion Illinois where there were true believers. Considered freak then as by nearly everyone
I will not chase down every objection you have raised. As Carl Sagan once said, “the burden of proof lies with those making extra ordinary claims.