ENB Pub Note: There is more to this story than meets the eye. Renaming the Gulf of America, it has brought up a legal question about the Oil and Gas drilling bans by the Biden-Harris administration. Those bans were for the Gulf of Mexico, not the Gulf of America. – This will be fun to see it play out in the the court systems.
US President Donald Trump has signed an executive order renaming Mount Denali, the tallest mountain in the US, and the Gulf of Mexico. The text of the order was released by the White House on Monday.
Here is the Gulf of America shirt I bought from the Mark Keye’s Show
According to the document, titled “Restoring Names That Honor American Greatness,” the purpose of the renaming is to promote American heritage. Trump had announced the changes in his inaugural speech on Monday.
”The naming of our national treasures, including breathtaking natural wonders and historic works of art, should honor the contributions of visionary and patriotic Americans in our Nation’s rich past,” executive order reads.
The mountain in Alaska will once again be called Mount McKinley, its name from 1917 to 2015, when then-US President Barack Obama returned the peak to its original native name.
’McKinley’ bears the name of the 25th US President William McKinley, who led the US to victory in the Spanish-American War in 1898.
As a result of the peace treaty, Spain relinquished its claim to Cuba, and ceded sovereignty over Guam, Puerto Rico and the Philippines to the United States. The US also annexed the independent state of Hawaii during the conflict, thus expanding its territory. McKinley himself never visited Alaska.
The executive order changes the official US term for the Gulf of Mexico to “Gulf of America.”
The body of water, located in the southeastern region of North America and bordered by the US, Mexico and Cuba, “has long been an integral asset” of the nation and is “an indelible part of America,” the executive order states.
It adds that the gulf’s natural resources and wildlife “remain central” to the national economy.
Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan, first introduced in his 2016 presidential campaign, has been a cornerstone of his latest political initiatives, with the new executive order emphasizing “American greatness” in its title and linking the restoration of historic names to Trump’s broader vision of national pride.
The renaming moves are part of a flurry of executive orders that Trump signed on Monday. Among them are a ban on government officials violating freedom of speech under the guise of fighting misinformation, a reversal of protections for transgender rights, and a suspension of foreign aid.
Fusion, AI demand, SMRs…is nuclear on the rise again?
Back in 2011 the Fukushima disaster seemed to spell the end of nuclear energy expansion in Europe and around the world. Now, new analysis from the IEA seems to show 2025 could be the year it makes a global comeback.
ELN explores the key narrative from the IEA:
Demand is up
With electricity demand skyrocketing for uses like electric vehicles, data centres and artificial intelligence, nuclear energy is emerging as a key player in delivering clean, reliable power.
Electricity use has grown at twice the rate of total energy demand over the past decade and is poised to accelerate further as the world embraces a new ‘Age of Electricity’.
Nuclear power, a dispatchable source of clean energy, offers round-the-clock availability at scale. Its ability to complement renewables, bolster energy security and reduce emissions has sparked a resurgence of interest, with support for nuclear expansion now seen in 40 countries.
This momentum builds on innovation within the sector, including the advent of small modular reactors (SMRs), which are set to redefine nuclear technology. The first commercial SMRs are expected to be operational by 2030, with their modular design promising faster construction times, reduced costs and lower investment risks compared to traditional large-scale reactors.
SMRs, are positioned to play a transformative role for nuclear, as they also align well with emerging sectors like data centres, where their scalability and modularity offer unique benefits.
Image: IEA
Generation is up
Nuclear generation is on the rise, with global output expected to hit new highs in 2025. While some countries are phasing out nuclear, or retiring plants early, others are ramping up production.
Japan is restarting reactors, France is completing maintenance works and new plants are coming online in China, India, Korea and around Europe.
In total, nuclear power contributes nearly 10% of global electricity and remains the second-largest source of low-emissions power after hydropower.
Currently, 63 nuclear reactors are under construction worldwide, representing 70GW of capacity—the highest levels since the 1990s.
Additionally, lifetime extensions have been approved for more than 60 reactors, covering nearly 15% of the global nuclear fleet. These measures highlight the growing recognition of nuclear energy’s role in achieving energy security and climate goals, complementing renewable energy sources.
The drive to expand nuclear capacity has seen countries launch a multi-nation initiative aiming to triple global nuclear output by 2050.
Annual investment in nuclear has surged by 50% since 2020, surpassing $60 billion (£41bn), covering both new plant developments and reactor lifetime extensions.
Different nations, different views
Despite its potential, nuclear energy faces challenges.
Governments must establish clear policies, provide financial incentives and ensure robust safety regulations to sustain momentum. Strategic planning is essential, including support for innovation, skilled workforce development and comprehensive supply chain networks.
Effective waste management and decommissioning processes are equally critical to ensuring the sector’s long-term sustainability.
Not every country sees a role for nuclear power in their energy mix – but for those that do, it can provide unmatched scalability and services.
The past three years have shown that strong government backing, coupled with private-sector innovation, can propel the industry forward.
However, the path to a nuclear renaissance requires balancing public acceptance, investment risks and the environmental considerations associated with waste and safety.
The year 2025 marks a pivotal moment for nuclear energy
IEA
The IEA concludes that the nuclear sector is poised to shape a cleaner, more secure energy future.
If governments and industries seize this moment, nuclear power could emerge as a cornerstone of the global energy transition, complementing renewables in the race to net zero.
The oil-rich kingdom is still assessing whether to join the bloc, the economy minister has said
Saudi Arabia is still evaluating potential membership of BRICS, the Gulf nation’s minister of economy and planning, Faisal Al-Ibrahim, told Bloomberg in an interview on Monday.
The economic bloc was established in 2009 by Brazil, Russia, India, and China, with South Africa joining two years later. Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates became full members on January 1, 2024 and Indonesia joined as a full member in January 2025.
“We’ve been invited to the BRICS, similar to how we’ve been invited to many other multilateral platforms in the past historically,” the Saudi economy minister told the news agency on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. “We assess many different aspects of it before a decision is made and right now, we are in the middle of that.”
Al-Ibrahim emphasized that Riyadh is “always focusing on fostering more global dialogue.”
The kingdom, along with five other nations, was invited to become a member of the group during the 15th BRICS summit, held in Johannesburg in August, 2023. Argentina, however, declined an invitation after President Javier Milei opposed the move, reversing the stance of his predecessor, Alberto Fernandez.
Last month, Russian presidential aide Yuri Ushakov announced that the group had approved ‘partner state’ status for Belarus, Bolivia, Kazakhstan, Thailand, Cuba, Uganda, Malaysia, and Uzbekistan – which took effect at the start of this year.
Partner status was established at the latest BRICS summit, hosted by Russia in Kazan in October, 2024. It is intended to serve as an alternative to membership, after over 30 countries applied to join the group. Holders of this status can permanently participate in special sessions of BRICS summits, ministerial meetings, and other high-level events. Partners can also contribute to the group’s outcome documents, but do not take part in the approval of documents or voting.
Global natural gas markets are set to remain tight in 2025 as demand continues to rise, and supply expands more slowly than before the pandemic and energy crisis, according to a new report by the International Energy Agency.
The agency said in its latest quarterly gas market report that markets “moved towards a gradual rebalancing last year after the supply shock that followed Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.”
Still, the global gas balance has remained fragile, highlighting the need for greater international cooperation to enhance gas supply security, the IEA said.
Driven by fast-growing markets in Asia, global gas demand rose by 2.8 percent, or 115 billion cubic meters (bcm), in 2024 – well above the 2 percent average growth rate between 2010 and 2020, it said.
At the same time, below-average growth in liquefied natural gas (LNG) output kept supply tight, while extreme weather events added to market strains, the agency said.
According to the report, similar dynamics are expected to persist in 2025 before the arrival of a wave of new LNG export capacity, led by the United States and Qatar, that is set to come online over the course of the second half of this decade.
Moreover, geopolitical tensions have continued to fuel price volatility in gas markets, the IEA said.
“Though the halt of Russian piped gas transit via Ukraine on January 1, 2025, does not pose an imminent supply security risk for the European Union, it could increase European LNG import requirements and further tighten global market fundamentals in 2025,” the report notes.
It warns that the vulnerability of Moldova is significantly greater than that of the EU, requiring close coordination between Moldova and its regional and international partners to ensure energy supply security through the winter.
Due to tighter market fundamentals, growth in global gas demand is forecast to slow to below 2 percent this year.
As in 2024, the growth is set to be largely underpinned by markets in Asia, with the region expected to account for over half of the rise in global gas demand, the agency said.
“Gas market fundamentals have improved over the past year, but for now, we are still seeing significant tightness due to rising demand and muted growth in LNG capacity. Heightened geopolitical uncertainty adds to the risks,” said Keisuke Sadamori, the IEA’s director of energy markets and security.
“While international cooperation on gas supply security has expanded since the recent energy crisis began, greater efforts are needed from responsible producers and consumers, who should strengthen their collective efforts to reinforce the architecture for safe and secure global gas supplies,” Sadamori said.
Trump issued the executive order, which was widely expected, just hours after officially taking over his second four-year term as the president.
The move is part of a series of new energy actions as part of the order named “unleashing American energy.”
According to the order, the energy secretary is directed to restart reviews of applications for approvals of LNG projects as “expeditiously as possible, consistent with applicable law.”
“In assessing the “public interest” to be advanced by any particular application, the secretary of energy shall consider the economic and employment impacts to the United States and the impact to the security of allies and partners that would result from granting the application,” the order said.
The Trump administration will also prioritize the development of Alaska’s LNG potential, including the permitting of all necessary pipeline and export infrastructure, the White House said in a separate statement.
US energy firm Glenfarne recently signed a deal with state-owned Alaska Gasline Development Corporation to develop the latter’s giant Alaska LNG export project.
The Biden administration said in January 2024 it will pause pending decisions on exports of LNG to non-FTA countries until DOE can update the underlying analyses for authorizations.
Last month, the DOE released its study on the economic and climate impacts of exporting increasing volumes of LNG from the US.
The lifting of the new moratorium will benefit several US LNG export projects.
Sempra Infrastructure, a unit of Sempra, is also working to secure DOE’s non-FTA export approval for the second phase of its Port Arthur LNG export project in Texas.
US President Donald Trump has signed an executive order freezing all US foreign development assistance for 90 days, pending a review.
Amid a barrage of other orders signed by Trump on his first day in office, the White House announced the decision as part of efforts to reassess the foreign aid strategy and ensure alignment with national priorities.
Current US foreign aid allocations are “not aligned with American interests and in many cases antithetical to American values,” and “serve to destabilize world peace by promoting ideas in foreign countries that are directly inverse to harmonious and stable relations internal to and among countries,” the executive order published by the White House on Monday said.
The executive order directs federal agencies to conduct a comprehensive review, overseen by the Office of Management and Budget, as well as State Secretary Marco Rubio, who can waive the 90-day period for “specific programs.”
It was not immediately clear how much US aid would be affected by the decision, as funding for a number of programs has already been allocated by Congress.
The executive order echoes the stance Trump took in his first presidency, when he moved to slash funding for various UN agencies and cut foreign aid.
“I will, very simply, put America first,” Trump said in his inauguration speech on Monday.
Trump was critical of US foreign assistance to countries including Ukraine during his reelection campaign, promising to ease the burden on the American taxpayer and focus on domestic priorities.
The United States had been a significant supporter of Kiev under former US President Joe Biden, providing substantial military, financial, and humanitarian aid, especially following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022.
In 2022 alone, Congress approved over $112 billion in assistance to Ukraine.
In April 2024, the US House of Representatives passed a $95 billion aid package for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan.
In January 2025, the United States announced a $500 million military assistance package to Ukraine.
Russia has consistently criticized such support, viewing it as a direct threat to its security. Russian officials have argued that Western military assistance prolongs the conflict and destabilizes the region.
ENB Pub Note: “Drill Baby Drill” sounds great on a campaign trail, but the oil companies in the United States are going to be more like “Drill Baby When Fiscally Responsible.” Michael and I have been covering this on the podcast, and it is a different world in both the private and public oil companies now. Returns to stakeholders and shareholders is critical, and we are seeing that energy investments will have the highest returns and growth for 2025 and 2026.
He said it and he meant it. “Drill Baby Drill!” – will be the new mantra of Donald Trump’s second term.
During his inaugural speech the President vowed to transform the nation’s future by tapping into its undergroud fuel supplies of oil and gas. He also declared a national energy emergency.
He said: “America will be a manufacturing nation once again and we have something no other manufacturing nation will ever have, the largest amount of oil and gas of any country on Earth – and we are going to use it.
“We will export American energy all over the world. We will be a rich nation again and it is that liquid gold under our feet that will help to do it.
“We will end the Green New Deal and we will revoke the electric vehicle mandate, saving our auto industry. In other words you’ll be able to buy the car of your choice.”
Just as in his first term Mr Trump has vowed to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Climate Accords but this time he will be able to do it much faster.
Much more will be spelled out in the coming days regarding his energy priorities, including nuclear energy and the future of renewables but it is clear, the Trump stance will make the whole world start to think very carefully, about what this means for international co-operation on climate change and net zero.
The construction of Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C nuclear power plants is facing significant delays and cost overruns, jeopardizing the UK’s energy security.
Sellafield Ltd’s cybersecurity failings have raised concerns about the safety and security of the UK’s nuclear industry.
The UK government’s ambitious plans to expand nuclear power are facing criticism due to the high costs and potential impact on taxpayers.
As the U.K. government doubles down on plans to develop the country’s nuclear power industry following decades of neglect, severe delays and cost increases are hampering progress. Delays and rising costs at the Sizewell C and Hinkley C nuclear projects have drawn public criticism, while concerns over public safety have been brought into question due to cybersecurity failings by Sellafield Ltd. While public support for nuclear power is at its highest level in decades, these failings could hinder the development of a strong nuclear power industry in the U.K.
Hinkley Point C in Somerset, in the Southwest of England, is the first commercial nuclear power station to be constructed in the U.K. since the mid-1990s. The project started over a decade ago and, in that time, costs have risen over and over again, sending it over budget and causing delays. The project, being led by Électricité de France (EDF), is now expected to take several more years to complete. Around 11,000 workers are employed by EDF to get Hinkley up and running, and while operations were set to commence in 2027, EDF said in 2022, it now looks like 2030 or 2031 could be a more likely start date. This additional delay is expected to increase the cost of the plant by billions.
Sizewell C, which is being developed by EDF in Suffolk, in the East of England, has doubled in cost since initial 2020 plans, to almost $49 billion, according to claims in a recent report. This price increase is attributed to the rise in construction materials and inflation, among other factors. EDF is currently in discussions with the government about how to fund the additional project costs. A recent report from the court of auditors advises that EDF seek new investors for Hinkley C before it makes a final investment decision on Sizewell C.
The U.K. government and EDF currently plan to fund 40 percent of Sizewell C, which is expected to power as many as six million homes once operational. The government is seeking financing from private investors to fund the remaining 60 percent of the development. A final funding decision is expected to be made at the government’s review of public spending in June. At Hinkley, the agreement with the government states that EDF will only begin to earn revenue once the plant is operational, which has put greater financial constraints on the French firm. A different agreement is expected for Sizewell C to reduce this financial burden on EDF.
The Labour donor and green energy entrepreneur Dale Vince has criticised the government’s funding plan, stating, “If Hinkley Point C is anything to go by, Sizewell C really should have rigorous financial scrutiny.” Vince explained, “Originally priced at £18 billion ($22 billion), the cost of Hinkley has ballooned to £46 billion ($56 billion) and then there’s the delays. Back in 2007, the then EDF chief executive Vincent de Rivaz said that by Christmas 2017 we would be using electricity generated from atomic power at Hinkley. We’re now in Christmas 2024 and Hinkley isn’t due to be completed until 2031.”
Many are concerned about the U.K.’s lack of experience in nuclear power after decades of no new development. Nuclear power plants are extremely complex to build and due to the lack of development over the past 30 years, Britain no longer has the right skills and contractors to support construction.
Simon Taylor, a professor at the University of Cambridge’s Judge Business School believes that “The U.K. and the U.S. have, in a sense, forgotten how to build nuclear power stations.” Taylor explained, “We may rebuild that knowledge, but it will take a long time.”
The long delays faced at Hinkley are forcing four of the U.K.’s oldest nuclear power plants to continue running for over a decade longer than previously planned to help bridge the gap in delivering clean power. EDF has agreed to expand the lifespan of the reactors, once again, to “boost energy security and reduce dependence on imported gas”. The Heysham 2 nuclear reactor in Lancashire and the Torness nuclear plant in East Lothian, Scotland are now expected to continue operating for an extra two years to March 2030.
Meanwhile, Sellafield Ltd has been ordered to pay over $470,000 in criminal charges over years of cybersecurity failings at its nuclear site in Cumbria in the North of England. The company left information threatening national security exposed for four years, according to the industry regulator the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR). The ONR also found that 75 percent of Sellafield’s computer servers were vulnerable to cyber-attack. The company pled guilty to charges in October last year.
Despite ambitious U.K. government aims to provide abundant clean energy through the development of the country’s nuclear power sector, energy experts are concerned that the severe delays and cost increases on new nuclear projects could compromise the green transition and end up costing taxpayers billions in additional costs. Meanwhile, cybersecurity failings by Sellafield Ltd have cast a dark shadow on the industry, meaning the government must quickly reassure the public of the benefits of developing the U.K.’s nuclear power over the coming decades.
Oil prices fell as traders await clarity on President-elect Donald Trump’s policy agenda.
Banks are gearing up for oil prices to fall below $60 a barrel by the middle of Trump’s term.
Standard Chartered predicts the dramatic slowdown in U.S. oil production growth witnessed in 2024 will continue over the next two years.
Oil prices fell in Monday’s morning session as traders await U.S. President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration in the hope of some clarity on his policy agenda. Brent crude for March delivery was down 1.5% to trade at $79.66 per barrel at 11.20 am ET while WTI crude for February delivery declined 1.8% to $76.46 per barrel. According to PVM oil analyst Tamas Varga, the price declines can be chalked up to the huge uncertainty over the incoming president’s new policies.
“Given the performance of the market so far this year, it is reasonable to see some people take profit before the Trump administration’s modus operandi becomes clearer.” Varga told Reuters.
Last month, a survey by law firm Haynes Boone LLC revealed that banks are gearing up for oil prices to fall below $60 a barrel by the middle of President-elect Donald Trump’s new term. Trump says he’ll push shale producers to ramp up output, even if it means operators “drill themselves out of business.” However, commodity analysts at Standard Chartered have predicted that the dramatic slowdown in U.S. oil production growth that we witnessed in 2024 will continue over the next two years.
However, commodity experts at Standard Chartered have argued that the dynamics of U.S. shale oil production make long-term supply increases difficult to maintain, noting that the country’s oil production is dominated by a few majors and independent producers, alongside private companies, rather than a national oil company as is often the case with many OPEC producers. These companies have largely left behind their trigger-happy, drill-baby-drill days and adopted strict capital discipline, eschewing rapid production increases in favor of returning more capital to shareholders in the form of dividends and share buybacks. StanChart also points out that extensive M&A activity in the sector has reduced the number of operating companies, changing the landscape from a patchwork of small producer acreages to larger contiguous acreage. This new modus operandi allows for complex drilling and completion techniques, including multi-pad wells with extremely long lateral sections that are able to optimize spacing and associated infrastructure.
We are here! President Trump and his new administration are getting ready to roll, but what Policy landmines did Biden and his administration leave? Is it like a mountain of debt mixed in with some of Biden’s dogs remains after a walk? Or are there some surprise regulations and geopolitical issues about to hit the global stage?
Highlights of the Podcast
00:10 – Introduction
04:25 – Energy Policy Changes Under Trump
08:14 – Biden’s 30 by 30 Initiative
12:00 – Global Perspective
14:21 – Trump’s National Emergency Declaration
18:30 – Energy Infrastructure Needs
19:23 – The Jones Act and LNG
21:23 – National Energy Emergency Obstacles
25:31 – Grid Security Issues
28:21 – Subsidy Challenges
34:00 – Trump’s Offshore Wind Pause
38:57 – DOE Loan Office Defies Inspector General, Gives $7.2B In Loan Guarantees To Rivian & Plug Power
41:59 – Terence Corcoran: Get Ready Canada for ‘Justin Carney
47:37 – ExxonMobil and Chevron Megadeals Are Cleared of FTC Antitrust Concerns
48:56 – Republican-led states sue Biden administration over offshore drilling ban
50:32 – US clean energy tax subsidies to cost $825 billion over 10 years, CBO says
51:24 – U.S. oil sanctions squeeze tightening markets even further
53:34 – US approves 2.4GW offshore wind project before Trump inauguration
Irina SlavInternational Author writing about energy, mining, and geopolitical issues. BulgariaDavid BlackmonPrincipal at DB Energy Advisors, energy author, and podcast host.Principal at DB Energy Advisors, energy author, and podcast host.Tammy NemethEnergy Consulting SpecialistStuart TurleyPresident, and CEO, Sandstone Group, Podcast Host
What Policy Landmines did Biden leave Trump?
David Blackmon [00:00:10] Hey, welcome everybody, to the Energy Realities Podcast January 20th, 2025, The Year of Our Lord 2025. Donald Trump will be sworn in as America’s 47th president at noon today Eastern Time, which is, I believe, 5 p.m. in the UK and 6 p.m. in Bulgaria. Correct?
Irina Slav [00:00:38] Seven 7:00pm.
David Blackmon [00:00:40] 7p.m.. Okay. Your to do. Okay. Yeah. In Texas it’s 11 a.m. and I am on pins and needles. Personally, I’m like the mayor of Giddy ville, as I like to describe.
Stuart Turley [00:00:54] I think I have you on David if you don’t mind me showing this. Not sure.
David Blackmon [00:01:07] Come on. Don’t freeze up.
Stuart Turley [00:01:11] No, I was turning it down, so we don’t. Okay, so here we go. There’s something for you.
David Blackmon [00:01:22] It’s pretty cool. So, okay, I’m going to calm down now. I’m losing my control. And it’s my week. The host, of course, because that’s how it happens on the Energy reality podcast. But we thank everyone for joining us. With me today, of course, is Mr. Stewart Turley, who I believe is in Oklahoma and his hideout up there.
Stuart Turley [00:01:45] Yep.
David Blackmon [00:01:46] And the Fords of Oklahoma. How are you today?
Stuart Turley [00:01:50] Cold. It was like one degrees with wind chill. And the water in the house is a problem. So fortunately, that’s what you have for houses when you go to the other ones.
David Blackmon [00:02:05] Also with us today from Bulgaria. Irina Slav. How are you?
Irina Slav [00:02:11] I’m great, David. Thank you. Spring is coming.
David Blackmon [00:02:14] Spring is is is it freezing cold in Bulgaria, too?
Irina Slav [00:02:17] No, no, not where I am. I’m in southern Bulgaria, so it’s really lovely and sunny.
David Blackmon [00:02:23] Well, I’m jealous. I’m so jealous. There’s ice on the ground up here in North.
Irina Slav [00:02:29] It’s.
David Blackmon [00:02:31] And Dr. Tammy Nemeth. And you’re in the UK today, aren’t you?
Tammy Nemeth [00:02:36] Yes, I am. Where it’s cold and experiencing. Don’t go
David Blackmon [00:02:42] Oh boy.
Tammy Nemeth [00:02:44] Will be in trouble again today.
David Blackmon [00:02:46] So. So what is the workhorse on the UK grid when the flouts natural gas.
Tammy Nemeth [00:02:53] Natural gas and hydro and the last bit of nuclear that they have?
David Blackmon [00:02:59] Yeah. Same thing in Texas. I looked out at the Ercot site this morning and natural gas was generating about 64% of our total load on the grid. We got the Ercot grid is in good shape for this freeze event. We’re not going to have major blackouts. And natural gas, of course, is keeping the homes heated and the lights on. So today’s topic, now that we’re six minutes in, what policy landmines did Biden leave for Trump related to energy? And there’s a good number of them. We’ve seen big news stories here recently about drilling bans and some of the other things that Biden has done that. Try to make it difficult for for Donald Trump to get hit the ground running as he has to do today with 200 executive orders, at least a couple of dozen of which I’m told are going to relate to energy policy. So I’m going to start. Today’s discussion by with me to give us the perspective of what’s happening in America with with our transition of power. Given what’s been happening since the Labor Party took over the government in the UK and is taking the UK in exactly the opposite direction.
Tammy Nemeth [00:04:25] Well, that’s a big one. I mean, it’s interesting that the that the UK is doubling down on the net zero transition and throwing energy reality out the window. And I think a lot of what happens in the UK and in Europe was predicated on the idea that America would join the net zero transition. And it has over the past four years with Biden. And now that’s all about to come to a crashing end with Donald Trump. And there’s this sort of realignment and reorganization and reconsideration to some extent of where countries go from here. Because if America doesn’t do it and it has cheaper energy, that and lower taxes and all of these different things that enable companies to build and produce things, then it creates a really competitive issue with respect to industrial capacity in Europe and the UK, which has been in decline obviously from the decarbonization efforts and has resulted in deindustrialization. And so there was a big fear, even with the Inflation Reduction Act, that the Biden administration had brought in, that companies were trying to take advantage of the subsidies and whatnot and move their production to America. And I think we’ll see an acceleration of this during the Trump administration if he’s able to actually undo some of the policy landmines. And I’d like to draw attention to something Alex Epstein put forward put out this morning on his substack, which is what he calls the Energy Freedom Plan. And in the thoroughness that Alex does, he goes through he has outlined five goals, 24 objectives and 112 specific actions that the new administration can do in order to sort of navigate through some of these landmines or obstacles that the Biden administration has put forward. And I think one of one of the the things that Alex is really good at doing is he goes through all of the different departments and agencies that have been given various powers over different energy policy issues. So you’ve got the EPA, you’ve got that’s the Environmental Protection Agency. You’ve got the Bureau of Land Management and and other groups and organizations and agencies. But but these two in particular have done was really limit what development oil and gas development can take place with respect to pipelines, with drilling, with building refineries, building LNG facilities and so on. And so this is, you know, his recommendations to to alter the situation. One of the interesting things I’m not sure if he if he talks about it because I haven’t had a chance to go through this in any great detail, is that one of the things the Biden administration did, which is in alignment with the EU and Canada and the other net zero jurisdictions, was to bring in the 30 by 30 initiative. And I want to highlight this because I think it’s important. It was the commitment to set aside or conserve 30% of America’s lands and 30% of its waters from development, period. Canada has done the same thing. The EU has done the same thing. And it looks like Trump is going to rescind that right away. So that’ll be interesting because that sets the the tone for all of this other stuff. So. Yeah. I highly recommend people looking at that.
Stuart Turley [00:08:14] Let me ask this, because we have all the banks that are bailing out of the net zero. So once you have the financial institutions bailing out of net zero, that is going to impact the availability of donation money to the politicians. Did I just say that? And so
David Blackmon [00:08:38] it depends on whether or not they’re actually going to take action in that regard or they’re just doing this to as a public relations kind of thing. Right.
Tammy Nemeth [00:08:46] And to avoid antitrust investigation, which was coming out of the House Judiciary Committee that I mentioned last week with those two reports that they did these interim reports calling it a cartel. And so in order to minimize the possibility of being investigated under antitrust, they remove themselves from defense and the net zero banking alliance and the net zero Financial Alliance Asset Managers Alliance in order to basically deflect that potential for antitrust. But all of those banks and BlackRock have said this isn’t going to affect our net zero policies. So, okay, what does that mean then?
Stuart Turley [00:09:27] Exactly.
Irina Slav [00:09:28] Yeah.
David Blackmon [00:09:28] Well, you know,.
[00:09:30] European banks going the same way. Sorry, David.
David Blackmon [00:09:33] Yeah. No.
Irina Slav [00:09:33] And European banks do not have to worry about being investigated for antitrust behavior. To me, this was the most important news that European banks have the full support of their governments to double down on net zero. And yet they’re not. If the American and the Canadian banks bailing out the European banks are following. Now, why might that be? Well, I mean, on net zero, that’s why.
David Blackmon [00:10:06] Exactly.
Tammy Nemeth [00:10:07] Yeah.
David Blackmon [00:10:09] Go ahead, Tammy.
Tammy Nemeth [00:10:09] They don’t need to they don’t need to be part of the of the the group anymore because they have those policies embedded within their operations is what what I would argue.
Irina Slav [00:10:21] Yeah. But most of them are still funding oil and gas except the nutcases that well they’re not so Nazi really because they only say they want some new projects. They keep funding already existing. Why is that? Because it brings in money.
Tammy Nemeth [00:10:40] Yeah.
Irina Slav [00:10:41] Yeah. progmatic versus cynical. They’re not. They don’t find the ideology. And now with Trump, they have even less incentive to participate either in groups or in any, you know, push for more wind turbines and solar panels. They have no incentive, not with those negative electricity prices. They will be losing money. That’s what it really comes down to. And it’s run some of them have an additional reason we don’t want to be prosecuted. Why should we do it if American personnel do it, doing it, they have an excuse.
Tammy Nemeth [00:11:25] Except the banks in Europe and the investment organizations still have to abide by the the Climate Reporting directive from the European Union. So through E frag. And then they have their green taxonomy. They have to have their transition plan. They have to be following these targets. Otherwise they’ll be litigated into oblivion for not following those transition.
Irina Slav [00:11:48] I would love to see what happens there. Yeah, exactly. That’s hitting them financially because it will if it’s not already.
Tammy Nemeth [00:11:56] Yeah, I agree. It’ll time will tell. Right.
Irina Slav [00:12:00] And it won’t be long. I think not the
David Blackmon [00:12:05] Irina How is, how is the American transition being viewed in Bulgaria? I think it’s it’s so great. We have these, you know, perspectives from from to to countries in Europe, from Canada and even from Oklahoma on this show. So it’s all these foreign countries and problems.
Stuart Turley [00:12:25] Oklahoma is the third world country, David.
David Blackmon [00:12:28] Yeah.
Irina Slav [00:12:30] Yeah. And he’s most of Western Europe, but who cares? I don’t actually. That’s all cool to, to, to people outside of my immediate friends circle friends and family circle. But I think people here view America mostly as a country with its own energy production, which makes you independent and secure with regard to energy supply. In fact, we have an American company operating one of the biggest thermal power plants here and.
David Blackmon [00:13:08] Natural gas.
Irina Slav [00:13:10] Yeah.
David Blackmon [00:13:10] Is it coal?
Irina Slav [00:13:12] Co? Yeah. I think they have some transition plan in order because, you know, a few governments ago they had this wonderful idea to shut the coal plants down and turn them into solar installations with batteries. I don’t know what the impact of the news about the biggest battery installation burning to the ground in California would have on these plans. But I do hope a U.S. will defend its plans or just sell it to someone who will continue operating it. But yeah, we. We. Envy you guys because you have your own energy. And I think a lot of ongoings are happy about Trump becoming president because he will hopefully reverse as much of Biden’s destructive energy policies as is reasonably possible. How much of these policies are actually reversed? I think that’s the most important question right now.
David Blackmon [00:14:21] Yeah. Well, so one of the things President Trump is going to do this afternoon to sign an order declaring a national energy emergency and a formal national emergency declaration. And I haven’t seen the exact wording of this orders, but if it is a former formal declaration of a natural national emergency and not just rhetoric, then that will give him some enhanced powers to reverse what he believes are orders that are destructive to the national security and regulations and legislated and even items that were in the IRA that he believes he can make a case for being destructive to the National. You’re it. So a lot’s going to depend on that order. If that order is a formal national emergency declaration, then then he’s going to be able to do a lot more by executive action. And I’m not really sure personally how I feel about that because I think we already have too much power invested in the executive branch of our government. But that’s mainly because Congress has basically surrendered its authority to legislate for the most part. Yeah. So when you do have a situation like this where we’ve had these last four years of misallocation, of trillions of dollars in taxpayer money and a buildup of $8 trillion in national debt in just four years, you know, I I’m kind of on the fence about whether or not that’s the right action to take, because if a Republican does it, then what’s to prevent the next Democrat who takes office from declaring their own national emergency and doing all sorts of damaging things again? But that’s one thing he’s going to do just in the normal course of business. Of course he can. He can completely reverse every energy related executive order Biden issued over the last four years, and he plans to do that. There will be litigation over some of those because the the resistance on the far left of our political spectrum now exists to do lawfare. And that’s what’s basically become their basically their entire playbook at this point because they have no political power at the moment. And so they’re going to we’re just going to see an explosion of lawfare campaigns organized by some of these left wing law for ordination with environmental groups like the Sierra Club and Center for Biological Diversity.
Stuart Turley [00:17:06] There’s a lawsuit that was just filed, David, with by the Republicans against the oil ban. And so there’s going to be more and more of those kind of things going on. And and Tammy and and Irina, when when we hear President Trump say drill, baby, drill, I’ve been saying that it is not drill, baby, drill anymore. President Trump is not going to be able to just flat out and say drill more. It does not work that way anymore. It is going.
Irina Slav [00:17:37] To them drill more.
Stuart Turley [00:17:39] No. It’s going to be drill, baby and fiscally responsible.
David Blackmon [00:17:45] It’s not going to be a big drilling boom. There will be some out in the Gulf of Mexico and you might see a little pick up in the onshore rig count. But I mean, we’re we’re increasing overall production dramatically with with just the few rigs we have running. There’s no reason for a big drilling boom to take place. What needs to take place is an infrastructure related to energy in this country. We need a lot of new natural gas pipelines. You know, we’re going to need to build more LNG export terminals because demand globally is exploding for LNG from the United States. Cutter One of the things that we’re exporting country. So one of the things.
Stuart Turley [00:18:30] One of the things to watch for today, David, in that emergency declaration is if there is a way for him to have put in there and I’ve sent notes, everybody that I possibly could, a wartime exemption for the Jones Act, because then you can then I hate the Jones Act, the Jones Act. I was only there to support 200 union jobs and it is crippled the United States. Let’s take away Hawaii is 60% of its power. Are you ready for this one? Heating oil generation? I mean, 60% is the most horrible thing on the planet. Why don’t you put in the LNG to electric plant there and then ship in our own cheap LNG? Now,
David Blackmon [00:19:23] what are you talking about? The New England states. The New England, right.
Stuart Turley [00:19:27] And then we don’t want them in Hawaii. Now now, with New England, with the biggest import facility in the Boston area is from Trinidad Tobago. Why are we not selling our own? This is just bad. Sorry.
David Blackmon [00:19:45] Yeah, I don’t expect Trump to get real bogged down in the Jones Act. Other than other than this is going to have to to do an exemption from the Jones Act for ship building. Yes, because our military is our Navy is been decimated by the Biden administration and by Congress’s refusal to appropriate the money needed to build more ships. And we have almost no shipbuilding capability left in America. And that’s in large part because of some provisions in the Jones Act. And because of a lot of other factors. So he’s probably going to suspend the Jones Act related to shipbuilding and and try to get that business back going. But, you know, it’s it’s such a quagmire in terms of having to have us. Man ships in US flag vessels move move goods from port to port. In the United States it’s ridiculous lol. But. It just becomes this this nightmare of litigation when you’re trying to really do anything about it.
Stuart Turley [00:20:52] I want to shout out to all of the people viewing on LinkedIn X and YouTube. It looks like on my X channel it is 725 people sitting there looking at it.
Tammy Nemeth [00:21:05] Whoa.
David Blackmon [00:21:07] That’s pretty awesome.
Tammy Nemeth [00:21:09] That’s amazing. Thank you so much for for attending everybody. This is so great. But I’m wondering if we could maybe go back to what are some of these obstacles? Because even
David Blackmon [00:21:19] on the actual topic of the discussion. Go ahead.
Tammy Nemeth [00:21:23] Because he even if like he he puts forward a national energy emergency, which would be something similar, I think, to what the Democrats were trying to convince Biden to sign a climate emergency declaration. So even if he does this, this emergency act, I think there’s a lot of different elements that aren’t so easily undone and create these kind of obstacles. So, David, what do you think is are some of the obstacles there?
David Blackmon [00:21:55] Well, one the biggest one he’s done in the transition was the the setting aside 625 million acres of the offshore from future drilling and leasing. And he did it under the provisions of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act of 1953, which does give presidential authority to set aside lands. It was when you read the law, it’s clearly intended for times of national emergency and more time for four presidents to do this exclusively for those kinds of needs. But, you know, it’s been used for set asides like this previously. It’s never been fully tested in the courts. There’s one lower court decision ruling in favor of a president’s authority to do this. And I think the Trump administration, unfortunately, after Trump reverses that order, they’re going to get sued and they’re going to have to test it all the way up to the Supreme Court, where it would be, you know, the Supreme Court’s going to rule that any any set aside like that under the LCA so they can be reversed by future presidents. Obvious that was the intent of the law. So but it’s going to take several years to get to that point. And that’s why Biden did that order. Everyone needs to understand a lot of the things Biden did in the closing days of this administration was designed to encourage these lawfare campaigns from the far left over the next four years. And he was setting a predicate for a big lawsuit over that provision of the. Okay. So he by making that order and that’s what’s probably going to happen, I think it’s pretty certain. So then you’re going to have, you know, they did all these efficiency standards in the Energy Department on gas stoves and gas appliances. Again, Trump is going to reverse those with an executive order today. And he should because they’re stupid and they’re counterproductive. And he’s probably going to do the same thing on Power Transformers, which already function at 99.3% efficiency. How much more efficient do you need to get with any piece of equipment? The 99.3%. Folks,
Stuart Turley [00:24:16] I’m I’m all I’m hoping that he does get in the first Trump administration he had an executive order that removed all equipment from China with a specific list of equipment from the U.S. grid and telecoms. After that, Biden put all that equipment back in. What happened over the Biden administration with these landmines? We had a balloon come over the first balloon that came over connected to the Internet and then the second balloon that came over. Guess what? We had the national security website go down. We had AT&T go down, we had LinkedIn go down, we had go down. We had all these things go down after the Chinese balloon connected to it. So how much of the U.S. grid could be taken now? The Wall Street Journal put out there that there was at least 32 of these major interconnects put back into the grid by the Biden, and that was on The Wall Street Journal. If that happened, let’s say 10% of the grid goes down permanently. That is a lot of problems in the United States.
David Blackmon [00:25:31] So it would be end up with a lot of people dying. Yes. Think about what would happen if 10% of the grid went down today with the whole country in a major freeze of them, it would be catastrophic. So, you know, I mean, that’s it’s just that there’s just so many things. I mean, I wrote a story that story in The Daily Caller that students are going to talk about later. We import 80% of our enriched uranium into this country. From where? From Russia and China,.
Tammy Nemeth [00:26:04] From Russia.
David Blackmon [00:26:05] From Russia and China.
Tammy Nemeth [00:26:08] It’s a Hillary Clinton deal.
Stuart Turley [00:26:10] Yes, it was. It was about bad joke. Tammy, thank you.
David Blackmon [00:26:16] And it’s all it’s just all to enrich these these elites like the Clintons, like the Bidens, like the Obamas, like like Bill Gates and all their billionaire buddies. The biggest irony I saw over the last week was Biden’s farewell address when he warned the country about an oligarchy of billionaires coming to rule the country. What do you say to all these energy policies? Who do you think they’re designed to benefit? At the end of the day, a bunch of billionaires like Bill Gates. Okay, folks, I mean.
David Blackmon [00:26:53] and it’s just bizarro world that we’ve been living in and hopefully at least on one outcome, regardless of what else happens. Of the new presidency will be that we get out of this bizarro fantasy world we’ve been living in where energy policy is concerned. And I went to the living in a room. Go ahead.
Tammy Nemeth [00:27:16] From your perspective, do you see obstacles here? You know, because we’ve been talking about different things with respect to wind and and the development issues and whatnot. Do you see other obstacles that maybe North Americans are missing?
Irina Slav [00:27:36] Do you think I would know? When you hear about the the whole, you know, judicial process that makes it possible to repeal certain law and replace it with another. But I have been reading that it might be tough to, you know, to to change some of the damage already done through subsidies. What I found most interesting and perhaps particularly challenging is that a lot of these subsidies are going to Republican run states and they wouldn’t want to part with the money. So Trump would have to offer them something comparable. So
David Blackmon [00:28:21] that’s great.
Irina Slav [00:28:22] You know,
Tammy Nemeth [00:28:24] that’s a good point.
Irina Slav [00:28:26] And I think that the thing to offer would be the existence of cheap energy, even without massive subsidies. You know, there’s abundant, cheap energy. Manufacture what you want. Not necessarily EVs, because let’s remember that the subsidies are very specifically targeted. You don’t get subsidies for anything. You get them for batteries and EVs and solar panels and whatever. So this this I see is a challenge that will be tough to deal with.
David Blackmon [00:29:06] Yet it will be because of all that since March 10th in statute in the I.R.A.. So it remains to be seen how what, if any, of that they’ll be able to actually permanently reverse.
Irina Slav [00:29:19] So they really have managed to to cement a lot of the IRA stipulations before they were kicked out.
David Blackmon [00:29:26] Yeah. Yeah. In Congress, you know, with such small majorities in Congress is going to be real hard to do a bill to actually repeal that.
Tammy Nemeth [00:29:35] But yeah.
David Blackmon [00:29:38] I do not imagine being in cell blue states fire trucks.
Tammy Nemeth [00:29:44] That’s cool.
David Blackmon [00:29:46] Thank you. Patrick. That’s the comment for today.
Irina Slav [00:29:47] No, I think he’s referring to let Jan pass. It was not near LA. It was in another
David Blackmon [00:29:55] And it’s about 20 miles north of San Francisco.
Irina Slav [00:30:00] Yeah. Yeah. It was close to San Francisco. But Patrick had another question. He wondered if the EU countries have an option to say we don’t want to do it. Well, yeah, they can leave the European Union. And what they have been doing is in Europe is basically. Finding excuses because these are binding targets and net zero and decarbonization, they’re binding targets. But the only punishment that the EU, EU can exact on us is financial. If you’re not making progress, we just won’t give you money for the transition. So that has been a lot of hands where you bet we can. We need more time, We need more money. We need more time. We need more money. I don’t think we can keep doing this for a very long time. What can they do to kick us out?
David Blackmon [00:30:58] Right.
Irina Slav [00:31:01] I would love to be kicked out of the European Union, but they won’t go that far. They need each and every member state to begin. A scary.
Tammy Nemeth [00:31:13] Yeah.
David Blackmon [00:31:14] Stu. Can we go back to that comment about Johanna? Rural America is Republican, and that’s where the wind turbines and solar are. We don’t want them. And now they’re finding that they don’t bring us as much benefit as far as economic increases. Yeah. And so that’s all true. Absolutely. And as you know, Robert Bryce has done a great job of chronicling how a lot of those communities are now pushing back and opposing the installation of these big wind farms because we’re fighting here. One of the reasons, as we find out that these wind farms get built just to take advantage of the subsidies and the tax credits, and they mean for years they just sit there without being hooked into the power grid. And some of them are not ever going to be hooked into the power.
Stuart Turley [00:32:03] We even had one, David in Oklahoma with A Tribe and Doug Sandridge and Robert Bryce wrote about this, that they’re having to pull out the entire wind farm of 80 wind turbines because they misrepresented the mining and lied about it. So it was not what they got from us. So hats off to the tribe for standing in front of.
David Blackmon [00:32:34] Tribe, wouldn’t it?
Stuart Turley [00:32:36] I believe so. But I had a podcast. I have to double check that. Dan Sandridge and Robert Bryce both wrote about it. It’s pretty, pretty impressive story.
David Blackmon [00:32:47] Yeah. One last thing on wind and then we’ll go to the newspaper or the news headlines.
David Blackmon [00:32:57] Something. Is the newspaper anymore. But is Godwin one of the orders President Trump is going to issue today is going to invoke a pause on progress of the offshore wind projects in the Northeast Atlantic. And I wonder what people think about this, because we all protested when Biden canceled Keystone XL. A what was then a $12 billion project, which would cost 20 billion now by the stroke of a pen and complained about that, you know, kind of harming the ability for companies to predict how the laws are going to be applied in the United States. I wonder what the opinion of our panelists is on Trump essentially doing what Biden did last year with the LNG pause and causing the entire offshore wind industry with the stroke of a pen and a start with a. We’ll start with you on that.
Stuart Turley [00:34:00] I’ve got mixed emotions, but I just heard a whale. A whale as well. Yeah. It’s such a total devastation and a farce that I’m in agreement with it now. The Keystone pipeline was different from the standpoint that we need Canadian oil sands heavy oil for our refineries. As it comes down, it needs to be blended into our pipeline mix for our refineries. I would love this is a trading thing with Canada that is needed. This is different than banning offshore subsidizing of a an energy project that is proven to be a wealth transfer rather than a good project. So I’ve got mixed emotions because the next president that comes in can do the same thing again. And who wants to have this? China has an advantage over us. They look at a 100 year cycle. Saudi Arabia has a 100 year cycle. They have a they do a great job with management of their sovereign wealth fund. If you take a look at OPEC, OPEC is actually doing a pretty good job trying to manage the oil pricing on those kind of things. When you take a look at American Squirrel. I mean, we have no idea. Give us 15 minutes. We’re going to have some serious rules.
David Blackmon [00:35:32] Irina
Irina Slav [00:35:34] Well, I’m not a fan of offshore wind or any wind, really. So I think it’s a good thing what Trump is going to do. But you’re right that he’s using the absolutely same arsenal that Biden used to impose lengthy approvals. So. I don’t know. Sometimes this weapon is being used for good and sometimes it’s being used for evil. And I think Trump is using it for good because think of all the lives marine mammal lives and bird lives. This is going to say he is actually being environmentalist.
David Blackmon [00:36:15] But there you go. Hey, I like that, Tammy.
Tammy Nemeth [00:36:18] Excellent point. I agree with both Stu and Irina. A big surprise that, you know.
Irina Slav [00:36:26] So boring.
Tammy Nemeth [00:36:28] Well, you know, there’s there’s ambivalence there because it is a heavy hand to use this kind of authority. And, yes, it smacks something of hypocrisy where you can be really angry about how it was used incorrectly. And because you you don’t agree with what it was being used for. And now we support it because it will save wildlife and whatnot. And I agree with Stu in the sense that the oil produces lots of other products. It’s not just oil. It’s not just, you know, when you have electricity, it’s just electricity. And I agree with Irene that the wind project was not a good project. It you know, it destabilizes the grid. It doesn’t in that security. It makes energy more expensive. And so why would you want to support something that is going to do all these things that undermines not just your energy security, but your national security, and it undermines the the real environment, not what a lot of the the people were arguing about Keystone Excel. So the the other sort of ambivalence I have is with respect to states rights. So when it comes to trying to promote infrastructure development because it’s necessary to stabilize the grid and to make sure that we do have a secure supply of oil and natural gas and and other things that are important for national and energy security. The states do have rights in in that sphere. But when it comes to offshore, you know, that’s that’s a bit of of a federal jurisdiction. And the same thing with Keystone when it when it’s building pipelines and the pipelines are going across different boundaries. Then, of course, the the federal government has a role in that. So, yeah, on the one hand, it’s it’s not good to have to use that power. But on the other hand, sometimes you need to and if it’s going to enhance national security and energy security, then perhaps that’s a good use of it.
David Blackmon [00:38:37] You know what? I think you all summarized everything I was going to say. So I don’t want to save time and not try to add anything to that. I agree with everybody. Let’s go to the headlines with Tammy, your first.
Tammy Nemeth [00:38:50] Okay. So the first story is about the DOE .. The Department of Energy Loan Office defies the inspector general, which told them to stop handing out these loans because of questionable potential for conflict of interest and to stop handing out loans between mid-December and January 20th. Well, the Doe loan office did it anyway, and they gave 7.2 billion in loan guarantees to Rivian, which is in financial trouble. And a company called Plug and Plug Power. And if you read the the letter, which almost is like a cease and desist, but not quite, there is significant evidence to to suggest that there’s a big conflict of interest in handing out these loans. The person handing out the loans looks to have connections with the companies. And, you know, and so they said stop handing out the loans, but they did it anyway. And this is the sort of issue I have over the past four years. And when Democrats are in power, when Democrats are in power, the courts tell them to do something and they ignore it. And there’s never seemingly any consequences. So what’s the consequence for this loan office to hand out loans when they were told by the inspector general not to? What’s what’s the consequence there? Will anybody go to jail or do they face a fine. Like what’s going to happen? Or are they just going to go to those companies, get their share of the loans that have been dispersed? I don’t know. But, you know, when you see the the amount of money in the billions that have been handed out to companies of questionable financial health, and one of the things that the that that the inspector general said, and I’ll quote it here said. These projects are inherently risky because they may have struggled to secure funding from traditional sources such as commercial banks and private equity investors. Well, no kidding. So if if they can’t secure funding from the normal places, maybe it’s because they don’t have a good business model. Or maybe there’s something wrong with the stuff that they’re doing. And should that should the taxpayers be on the hook to help out companies that aren’t good enough to secure private equity financing? So that’s that was really I thought was an important story. And then the second one is away from America and to Canada, where Justin Trudeau had resigned. The Liberal Party is looking for a new leader. And now we have Mark Carney, who’s thrown his hat in the ring where he did his soft launch with Jon Stewart. So apparently America doesn’t matter except to launch your Liberal Party leadership course. You know, and so Terence Corcoran in the Financial Post has written an excellent article called Get Ready Canada for Justin Carney, because Mark Carney has been the advisor, the economic advisor to Justin Trudeau since Covid some 2020. Carney was hired for $1 a year or as a volunteer or whatever it is to advise on build back better. Which how did that turn out? He’s been on the record saying how we need carbon pricing around the world. He was the architect of defense and all of these different things. He’s pushed the network for greening the financial system, which through the central banks, he was the architect of that one. So what does do people think he’s any different now that he’s saying, well, maybe carbon pricing, the way we’ve done it hasn’t been had the best outcome. So we can Reconsider
Irina Slav [00:42:46] really.
Tammy Nemeth [00:42:47] Right. So what does that mean? Well, they’re going to put it on all the companies who will have to flow it down to the consumers, but the consumers won’t see it as a direct charge from the government. Okay. And and then the other thing, if I could just finish here with Carney is that he and Janet Yellen wrote a report back in 2020, 2021, where they talked about, you know what, all this climate stuff and carbon pricing has become too politicized. What we need is an appointed carbon council who will make decisions rather than the politicians because the politicians are too shortsighted. So we’ll have these appointed carbon councils with lengthy terms so that they can make these decisions instead of the politicians and look at the longer term. That’s who he is. And if if Canadians are going to vote for somebody like that, then there will be in big trouble.
David Blackmon [00:43:46] Before we move on isn’t this is exactly what the Democrats did at the 1st of August. Mark Carney is Kamala Harris. Justin Trudeau is Joe Biden. It’s exactly the same tactic, you know, and you’re probably going to see this happen a lot more in some other countries as well, maybe even in Brazil in next year’s presidential contest.
Tammy Nemeth [00:44:08] Good Point, yeah.
David Blackmon [00:44:12] That’s all. One more. Go ahead Stu.
Tammy Nemeth [00:44:16] No. So this is just my substack.
David Blackmon [00:44:19] Sorry. Yes.
Tammy Nemeth [00:44:20] We’re. I had an article last week about.
Irina Slav [00:44:28] Woops.
David Blackmon [00:44:30] Did she just freeze up?
Irina Slav [00:44:31] Yeah. Yeah, she froze.
David Blackmon [00:44:35] Tammy you’re frozen.
Irina Slav [00:44:37] Stu, are you frozen or are you just being very still?
David Blackmon [00:44:41] Stu’s frozen, too. Just you and me are in. And I can’t advance the slides.
Irina Slav [00:44:48] So why don’t you tell me about your headlines?
David Blackmon [00:44:52] Yeah. I don’t remember what they were.
Irina Slav [00:44:58] Let me see what is going on.
David Blackmon [00:45:02] This is wild. Anyway.
Irina Slav [00:45:05] Selective. Let me see if I can. I remember one of mine was about the cost of some Biden climate policies. And you’ll be amazed when I tell you all the news was there were going to cost a lot more than initially expected.
David Blackmon [00:45:29] Yes. Yeah, exactly. It’s all costing a lot more than expected.
Irina Slav [00:45:34] Yeah. This keeps happening, and it looks like nobody’s paying attention.
David Blackmon [00:45:40] Yeah. I mean, the R rate, total subsidies and the R. Both says it’s going to be well over a true three times 300% innovation.
Irina Slav [00:45:55] Hey, what happened?
Stuart Turley [00:45:57] No idea. Anyway, we’re showing back, and it looks like we’re still alive.
David Blackmon [00:46:05] And let’s go to our Irina’s headlines. So. Still, we lost a figure.
Stuart Turley [00:46:14] Am I here?
David Blackmon [00:46:16] Yeah. You’re here now? Yeah.
Stuart Turley [00:46:17] Okay. Let me get the slides back up. Sorry about that, guys. That’s a holy smokes, Batman. Just take me a second. And we’re off and running. We’ve. We had a lot of folks in 1300 on my X channel, so bear with me while I get us restarted.
Irina Slav [00:46:40] If I have a good comment, it will cost more and take much longer. This keeps happening. They keep moving the deadlines and the price tags.
David Blackmon [00:46:50] And one of the reason it’s costing more, too, is that, you know, these wind towers, turbines and blades come with 25 year advertised lifetime. But what the operators are doing is retiring them after seven years so that they can take advantage of the other round the more so. Right. Yeah. So that’s part of how they’re making these things profitable. Even when they’re not hooked into a power grid, they’re just sitting out there, turned and not generating anything.
Irina Slav [00:47:17] Yeah.
David Blackmon [00:47:18] Here we go. Looking here.
Stuart Turley [00:47:20] And we wanted to tell Tammy’s is the name is Substack. We wanted to make sure we advertise.
David Blackmon [00:47:27] That her substack folks. A great stuff.
Stuart Turley [00:47:31] Okay, there’s yours, David.
David Blackmon [00:47:33] Here’s me. Okay, So, well, just a couple of quick things. The ExxonMobil and Chevron big deals got FTC antitrust approval on Friday. And for ExxonMobil, this means its takeover of Pioneer Natural Resources is final. That deal is done. And and so they’re now the owner, officially a pioneer natural resources and by far the biggest producer in the Permian Basin for Chevron. And their take over $53 billion acquisition of Hess Corporation. It’s still not quite final because they’re involved in arbitration with Exxon Mobil over the Guyana Project Stabroek Block That Exxon Mobil is the operator of Exxon. It’s challenged Chevron’s takeover of Hess, which is a 25% minority owner in that project. So are 30%. And so that that is going to be resolved here sometime over the next few months. And it’s hard to know which way that one’s going to go. Exxon Mobil actually wrote the clause that they’re challenging that acquisition under when they entered into the consortium agreement with Pass and Sener. And they seem to be in a strong position. So that one still up in the air. The other one that I think is really important is a Republican led state sue Biden administration over offshore drilling. You know, this is the big 625 million acre offshore drilling ban Biden put into effect or ordered into effect a couple of weeks ago and that there’s going to be litigation over. But these Republican led states are in actuality, they’re all the coastal states that are majorly impacted negatively by Biden’s order, and they include Alaska, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, but not Texas and Georgia. But not Texas yet. I understand Texas will join that suit as well so that all the Gulf Coast states will be in it. And those states all have standing to challenge that. So that is the first litigation that’s been filed against that order. And once Trump reverses the order this afternoon, you’re going to see environmental groups champion to sue Trump and his attempt to reverse it. So there’ll be a lot of litigation over that one. And those are the two updates. I know
Irina Slav [00:50:03] you really are litigious culture and.
David Blackmon [00:50:06] We are. And it’s because we waste so much time and energy on that effort. And you can find me on substack at Energy Reality Absurdities Blackmon@substack. Com is the website address and everything I write anywhere ends up being reposted and linked there.
Irina Slav [00:50:30] yeah. Here’s the story I was talking about US clean energy tax subsidies to cost 825 billion over ten years.
David Blackmon [00:50:38] The subsidy alone. My God.
Irina Slav [00:50:40] Yeah. And originally that was supposed to cost less than I think it was less than 300 billion. But what’s new? You know, as Patrick says, it will cost more and take much longer. This keeps happening with the transition and nobody seems to pay attention, nobody at the top. I mean, yeah, it’s going to take us longer. Will need to double down and tightens and belt because it’s also going to be more expensive. No wonder people are starting to beat that up. And the the other headline I have is wonderful is from John Kenneth. That’s formerly with Reuters. Now he’s independent and I salute him for it. So you always talk U.S. oil sanctions squeeze tightening markets even further. Also now we have a tightening market. Until a week ago, it was all surplus. You know, there was enough oil in the world. I’m not directing this rant, John. No, not at all. Directing it to all these media outlets who keep pumping the same narrative day after day. China demand is weak. There’s too much supply. OPEC has the spare capacity. Even without this spare capacity, we’re going to be in surplus in 2025 as we were in 2024. Now, one man has come and said it’s a tightening market and prices are going to go higher.
Stuart Turley [00:52:13] Yeah.
Irina Slav [00:52:15] So yeah, that tide is turning as well and very happy to see it turn.
David Blackmon [00:52:21] It’s amazing how the narrative changes with president.
Irina Slav [00:52:26] Yeah, not just the president, but suddenly it becomes too obvious to ignore. Yeah. Yeah. You know, if the market was so well supplied, the latest sanction barrage wouldn’t have had any effect. It would have had a temporary effect on prices. But Brant is now, you know, above 80 a barrel. So, what, more than a week. And it could go even higher. I mean, freight rates, the tanker is double what they used to be before the sanctions. Yeah, that. That. That was my rant today. I feel vindicated.
David Blackmon [00:53:04] And a fine rant. It was.
Irina Slav [00:53:07] Thank you. And that’s my substack. I’m thinking of rebranding because this is so boring. Irina Slav on energy. But for now is Irina Slav on energy.
Stuart Turley [00:53:18] I like it.
David Blackmon [00:53:19] Problem with rebranding is then people have to find you again.
Irina Slav [00:53:23] Yeah, I agree. That’s why I’m reluctant.
Stuart Turley [00:53:26] We’ve already talked about the David the Republicans take off in the lawfare this morning. The U.S. approves 2.4GW offshore before the Trump inauguration. You cannot even get out of the cotton pick and Dover without approving another wind farm.
Irina Slav [00:53:51] And what’s the point if he’s going to ban it?
Stuart Turley [00:53:55] I don’t know. I just find it despicable. The Bureau of Ocean Management has given the final approval needed for the South Coast Wind Project, formerly known as the Mayflower Wind. Only days before the offshore slaying of the 47th president entered the White House. I don’t get it.
David Blackmon [00:54:17] The operator of that project’s, too.
Stuart Turley [00:54:22] It’s the South Coast Wind project. I mean, look in the article here.
David Blackmon [00:54:26] Well, I just wonder if it’s because Orsted has been a favorite company of this administration.
Irina Slav [00:54:33] I can’t wait to see how Orsted’s share price is faring tomorrow.
David Blackmon [00:54:38] Yeah. Yeah.
Stuart Turley [00:54:40] I have to hand it to the Trump administration because they have got just a rock star group of folks, and Lee Zeldin and Chris Wray and Doug Broom are the team to help try to reduce energy prices. And David, I got to give you a shout out for your cover in your article talking about her on the there are horrific processes that the Trump administration folks were going through. The Democrats just really embarrassed themselves. And I love your article on that. It was absolutely abysmal. You can find me on energy news beat dot co in my energy news beat Substack. And real quick. Dogs and cats are different. And I think this is going to be very important as we.
Stuart Turley [00:55:53] So the dog jumps up there to move the camera so he can eat the snacks that are up on the thing. And then the cat comes back and goes. Wait a minute. Hal, are you there?
David Blackmon [00:56:04] What’s this? Is this.
Irina Slav [00:56:08] The Biden administration and the cat is Trump.
David Blackmon [00:56:15] That’s perfect. That’s perfect.
Stuart Turley [00:56:18] I’d like to thank all the folks on LinkedIn, YouTube, and on my channel. I do appreciate it. Looks like I’ve got 1427 still alive on my X channel, buddy.
Irina Slav [00:56:31] Thank you all.
David Blackmon [00:56:31] And to thank everyone for joining us. I hope Tammy is okay. We still haven’t gotten her back and wonder what happened. And we are at time. It’s been exactly an hour. We had a wonderful discussion today, Irina, Stu, Tammy and all of you who chimed in with questions and comments. Really, really appreciate it makes your experience much more enjoyable. We will be back here again next week at the same time.
Irina Slav [00:57:01] As to be fun. Go watch the inauguration.
David Blackmon [00:57:05] Absolutely.
Irina Slav [00:57:06] Have a great day everyone.
Sponsorships are available or get your own corporate brand produced by Sandstone Media.
