Energy News Beat
What a tremendous international discussion on the Energy Transition and the climate drama at COP28. You can’t buy this kind of entertainment with the Energy Transition team. Send in your questions, and see the gang every Monday morning. Follow Armondo and get notices of events.
Armando Cavanha, Host, https://www.linkedin.com/in/cavanha/
Tammy Nemeth PhD, https://www.linkedin.com/in/t-nemeth-567110246/
David Blackmon, https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-blackmon-2325189/
Stu Turley, https://www.linkedin.com/in/stuturley/
Armando Cavanha [00:00:03] Cop 28 or COP28. Some people call it cop COP. Good morning and good afternoon. David Blackmon, Tammy Nemeth and Stuart Turley, It’s a pleasure.
David Blackmon [00:00:15] Hello.
Tammy Nemeth [00:00:16] Good Morning
Stuart Turley [00:00:17] Hey, good morning. How’s my favorite international team?
Tammy Nemeth [00:00:23] You’re part of it now. This is great.
Armando Cavanha [00:00:26] What’s up? David, please, let me start with you. Let me put. I stuff off pictures. President company president saying that there’s no science behind demands for phaseout of fossil fuels. Another U.N. chief calls on leaders to quit fossil fuels phaseout not only with us and our friends fated. Fated at all. Oil and gas fuels must convert to renewables. So it’s not that. Oh yeah, it’s not that like a football game when it shows up in support. It’s a lack of science, technology and their evidence for a safe transition. Or do you agree or not agree?
David Blackmon [00:01:20] Well, that’s certainly what. So Thorburn, Jabara, Alger, Jabara, I think it is said and created some controversy, of course, that he said that there’s no science behind proposals to completely phase out fossil fuels and no science, that no no path to have a sustainable society without use of fossil fuels. And he’s absolutely correct about that. But of course, it created a lot of controversy, not even the IPCC. Advocates for a complete phaseout of fossil fuels and its annual alarmist reports that, you know, form the basis for holding this conference in the first place. So it’s not surprising that the sultan, who is the head of the UAE National Oil Company, said that, said those things. He probably naively believed that it was okay to tell the truth at this conference about these things. But he apparently didn’t get the memo that this conference is not about telling the truth. It’s about sustaining the grift and the and the multitrillion dollar transfer of wealth that all of this represents. And, you know, there’s 70,000 attendees at this year’s conference, and they all have a financial interest in continuing the grift. So those kinds of statements that tell the truth about all this are going to be highly unpopular.
Armando Cavanha [00:02:56] Yeah. Stuart. Agree. It was David.
Stuart Turley [00:03:01] Heck, yes. Love, David Blackmon, anybody later? Oh, yeah. I’ll tell you what, David, You hit it right out of the park. And the wealth transfer. I have just talked to a bunch of folks around the world and it’s we are being shut down, all of us. And I know for a fact that Google does not like us. Social media does not like us. And it is inward. It is the elite against humanity. Let’s not forget what this is all about. It’s a wealth transfer against humanity. I Armand, I can’t believe this is such a despicable topic that we have to do. I’m sorry.
Tammy Nemeth [00:03:49] And I’d like to add one thing. So, when he was talking about there’s no science behind it. I think one of the things he was meaning was that there’s no science that says if we stop using fossil fuels, the temperature will stay the same. Like it’ll be an immediate 1.5 degrees, whatever. And he was really pushing back on that. And then we have John Kerry today saying, oh, I’ve got all these climate scientists who say you’re wrong and this is all the science there that backs up whatever. And. And I think that’s I think Stu’s right that that there is this there’s a movement to basically undermine modern civilization the way we have it with the technology and whatnot. Because if if it’s truly about emissions and they have carbon capture, which can reduce the emissions, then why do we have to ban fossil fuels? Why do we have to keep it in the ground? Right. So is this about emissions or is it not?
Armando Cavanha [00:04:54] But looks to me you you are a doctor and a scientist. So tell us how science can have a good approach for this problem that we have nowadays.
Tammy Nemeth [00:05:08] That’s a very interesting question because, you know, there’s I think there’s been a lot of politicization in how research is done, how studies are put together, who funds the studies, how scientists and young scholars can get on that publication bandwagon. And there’s there’s a lot of a lot of politics involved. I mean, I remember going through grant applications and whatnot and seeing, you know, do you hit the right keywords? Are you saying the right trendy stuff in order to secure that grant? So and we’ve heard a lot in the past, little while from Roger Pilkey and others who’ve had to adjust their findings or adjust how they present things just to get published. So, you know, I think it’s there’s there’s troublesome aspects there on the trajectory of the way science and scholarship has been has been done and is and is going forward.
Armando Cavanha [00:06:03] Or often. We have an interesting point from the Domenico.
David Blackmon [00:06:11] The annual primary energy consumption 600 quadrillion BTU per year as follows 200 watt oil, one second coal 140 cod gas remainder hydro balance, highly subsidized renewables. So of the 600 quads three 6500 or fossil fuels. So you’d have to replace five six of global energy or annual primary energy consumption to get there. And you know, the cost estimates for doing that are in the hundreds of trillions of dollars that nobody has.
Armando Cavanha [00:06:50] That’s right. Another point that time is short. And David, one, congratulations. I be
David Blackmon [00:06:59] That be president of Cop28 may go to school to know science versus fossil fuels versus climate change effects. We need to fund need a fund to set up 3030 model in Bangladesh. Aja Kumar Das, an architect of 3030 model to climate actions in Bangladesh. And there’s a web address and a phone number which maybe we should go.
Armando Cavanha [00:07:25] That is a good idea. Let me show another picture that we have today. Is the UN wants to shut down production. Are they mentally well off? You know that. Or is.
Stuart Turley [00:07:50] The reason is the U.N. wants political reasons, is that natural gas and LNG around the world is a geopolitical issue. Now, I’ll tell you, it is frightening. If Japan has had some serious pipeline issues and with those pipelines, they’ve been shut down. Japan has to import all of their energy. Do you want a Western civilization like China excuse me, Japan, to either go with China and Russia if they’re going to get their natural gas. Or do you want them importing Russian LNG or United States LNG? This is a complicated issue. Who would benefit by the U.S. shutting down their LNG, their great oil and gas? Europe. The U.S. would be crippled. Who’s trying to shut down Europe? In the U.S., the U.N.. All those in favor of voting. The U.N. out of the U.S.? Me? I’m all in favor. Let’s get them out of here. Those chatter heads are absolutely not having anything to do with the United States. Best interest.
David Blackmon [00:09:12] And who are that answer? Must benefit by that. The countries that were most benefit by that are Russia, Qatar and China. Right. By diminishing the West’s energy security, China benefits. China wins. So, you know, I mean. If you want China, if you want the United States and the rest of the Western world to be completely dependent on China for its energy security in the future, this is the plan you need to follow.
Armando Cavanha [00:09:45] But tell me and.
Stuart Turley [00:09:46] David, let me throw this. Oh, sorry. I’m sorry. Let me throw this little ugly baby in there that David just brought up. If we’re going to put energy in there and they’re wanting China to lead the rest of the world, what happens? You give the second order of effect is you get rid of U.S. LNG. China is going to sell more of their renewables. They have increased their pollution 220% because of their over 400 coal producing plants. They’re using those coal producing plants to make more wind turbines that we’re going broke for in the West. This is a beautiful second and third order. I love my camera, by the way. Anybody watching this is absolutely going nuts with this entire. So you may have asked one simple question, Armando, and it is a complicated answer. Well done. But sorry,
Armando Cavanha [00:10:53] Europe, you’re. No, no, no. Welcome. Europe’s totally depend on energy from the West now a days in the past was from Russia. So how what can happen is if this war. Ends very fast.
Tammy Nemeth [00:11:17] That’s a good question. I’m not sure it’s. I feel like they’re burning bridges with Russia so that even if the war ends, they’re not going to go back to having that relationship with Russia. You know, it might build up over time, but the way it’s currently going, it would seem, no, that’s not the case. And with respect to wanting to stop America from producing LNG Canada’s first LNG facility, the pipeline to it has just finished completion and it should be starting up next year. So Canada will be able to export, will be able to export from the Pacific and on the coast of British Columbia. And, you know, there’s potential markets there. Taiwan is completely dependent on the various chokepoints to get their natural gas from the Middle East through the Straits of Hormuz, then through the South China Sea, which China controls. If China were to try and make a move against Taiwan, it would be so easy to cut off the LNG tankers going there. So Canada has an opportunity to help out on the West Coast. They’re sending the natural gas, whether it’s to Taiwan or Japan, and help alleviate some of the pressure on the United States that’s been exporting so much. So I can understand why the U.N., which is, you know, I hate to say it, quite beholden to China in many respects to be pushing these ideas. That would definitely give China the advantage going forward. And, you know, they keep talking about that. We’re in this, you know, crisis in the relationship with China and they need to decouple and this and that and the other thing. Then why would you want an energy policy that gives China the upper hand? Because that’s what this would do.
Armando Cavanha [00:13:05] But then be a friend, try to import from Canada one year or two years ago, I guess after the start of the war and Canada refused to export. What’s the reason for that?
Tammy Nemeth [00:13:20] Well, because we don’t have any natural gas pipelines going to the East Coast and we would have to build it through four other provinces, two of whom said there’s no way in heck they would give permission for the pipeline to cross their borders in our own country. And even though Germany said we would really like your natural gas and so on, that we don’t have a facility on the East Coast, but we do have one that’s, you know, be ready to go next year on the on the West Coast with, I think, three more in the pipeline. So there’s the potential for three more floating LNG terminals for export at some point in the near future, barring any kind of crazy federal position to say no more, no more exports.
David Blackmon [00:14:05] Yeah.
Armando Cavanha [00:14:05] Right, right. Let me bring a challenge for you. Saddam
David Blackmon [00:14:11] Don’t EVs. And he wants.
Stuart Turley [00:14:15] Powers.
David Blackmon [00:14:17] Yes, I do. Obviously, you know, and and that’s going to be a growing problem here in the United States because the Biden policies of shutting down coal and natural gas power plants are creating a real. Crisis. I mean, we’re going to have a crisis in baseload power generation in the near future.
Armando Cavanha [00:14:39] David But, but, but closing and natural gas and coal replacement with what?
David Blackmon [00:14:46] Well, they think they can replace it all with solar panels and big windmills and batteries that have a three hour cycle time. And this is literally what they think. And it’s it’s it’s insane. I mean, it just doesn’t work like that. Reality does not function and doesn’t care about these fantasies.
Armando Cavanha [00:15:06] Oh, my God.
Tammy Nemeth [00:15:08] Like what? Like he. Jabbar said it correctly when he said, What do you want us to do? Go back to caves. Because ultimately, if you stop all this energy use, what’s. What’s the result? Do we go back to living like it was in the late 19th century, early 20th century, before electrification? Or, you know, you have a minimal amount of electricity, which means then you have to give up a whole bunch of things in how you live your life, which, you know, they’re talking about how climate change hurts women. Actually, this environmentalism hurts women. It takes away our ability to have labor saving devices because when you can’t use your washing machine, who’s doing the laundry by hand? Well, to be women. And if you can’t use the dishwasher, who’s doing the dishes? That’ll be women. So, you know, this environmental movement is actually very much against women. It makes life harder for us.
Armando Cavanha [00:16:02] Impressive.
Stuart Turley [00:16:02] Not in my house.
Tammy Nemeth [00:16:06] Good for you.
Armando Cavanha [00:16:11] But, Doctor, tell me. Imagine that you are a Brazilian person. Oh, you are? Well, welcome. Do you see Brazil always promising? Only like I see fighting fossil fuels at Cop 28. Then the same time joining OPEC.
Tammy Nemeth [00:16:32] And honestly, I feel like they were they were holding up that up as a shield. Look at us. We’re going to do all these green financing policies and so on, but hey, we’re going to join OPEC. So, you know, as an observer, apparently just as an observer, to have a seat at the table.
Armando Cavanha [00:16:49] Yeah. David, But what’s the reason that the US is not part of OPEC’s the most important producer in the world today?
David Blackmon [00:16:56] Well, you know, that’s people have asked that question in recent years. When OPEC began, of course, it was this cartel of oil exporting countries and the United States was the main consumer of their production and wasn’t producing all that much at the time. Now, of course, we’re the biggest producer on earth and still the biggest consumer of crude oil, although China is catching up pretty rapidly. So, you know, whether it would make sense, I don’t know. The United States does have an advantage of not being in OPEC and, you know, not being part of those monthly negotiations and quotas and all that. And the main problem with the United States being in a group like that is our government has very little ability to control how much our industry produces because, you know, we we have a free market and thousands of different companies drilling wells and producing them in the United States. And, you know, for our country, that’s a much better system that we don’t want to lose.
Armando Cavanha [00:18:01] With independence is short. You know, there is no control.
Tammy Nemeth [00:18:08] Well, I mean, the history, the history of OPEC. Sorry, that the history of OPEC was it was created specifically to go against the United States. So I really don’t think that there is a way for the United States to join OPEC. That’s just, you know, not not something I think that that’s reasonable.
Armando Cavanha [00:18:28] Yeah, that’s right. Dr. Sander is asking. You’ll have a record of this. Yes. Yes. You’re gonna find and. And LinkedIn. You can find your.
Stuart Turley [00:18:41] And it’s available on all podcast channels.
Armando Cavanha [00:18:45] Oh, and Stuart Lover.
David Blackmon [00:18:48] Yes. And you too. Yes.
Armando Cavanha [00:18:51] And another in July of last year.
David Blackmon [00:18:55] Our privatized office.
Tammy Nemeth [00:18:55] Yeah
Armando Cavanha [00:18:57] Free market. can controlled it. Yeah. Yeah, exactly. What that david have mention? Yeah.
Stuart Turley [00:19:03] And Tammy. I’m sorry. Tammy, I think are current in the United States. Current government and administration are so evil when it considers the rest of the world. I would like to personally put in a debate between our knucklehead and your knucklehead. So we, the Canadian knucklehead. And so, you know, you sit back and go, I’ll raise you a knucklehead and let’s have our knucklehead visit with your knucklehead, because it is unbelievable. The rest of the world is taking care of Saudi Arabia first. They’re taking care of Japan first, China first. What’s the United States doing? We’re absolutely destroying the United States citizens. What is Canada doing?
Tammy Nemeth [00:19:55] Same thing, destroying the citizens, you know, making with the carbon tax the way it is. It’s it’s extremely expensive to heat your house in winter. I mean, Canada has cold winters and they just add a tax and then they tax the tax. So, I mean, people are are punished for heating their homes and getting around and taking their kids to hockey practice. You get punished for that. So, you know, our knucklehead versus your knucklehead, I don’t know which one would win. I think it would be a truce of of ineptitude and incoherence, to be honest.
Stuart Turley [00:20:29] But yeah, but years. Years wouldn’t be relying on his depends during the debate.
David Blackmon [00:20:34] Oh now.
Tammy Nemeth [00:20:34] No. He’d probably have a little earpiece telling him.
Armando Cavanha [00:20:39] But Stuart tell me you believe that the oil companies will commit to decarbonization from the production levels to the cars at the end of the process? Do you believe that.
Stuart Turley [00:20:52] The great world of energy, oil and gas companies. Yes, I think that we’re going to see the big oil companies if let’s take total energies. They went all in on renewables and they went back to all of a sudden retro. They pulled a Scooby because of the investing ESG investing, like BlackRock has now said it’s okay. So they have come back in investing. Okay. Total Energies is invested in all these natural gas plants in Texas. So then you start turning around at BP. Used to be but beyond petroleum and is now back to, oh, yeah, we’re British Petroleum. So then you take a look at all of the other investments that are out there. Let’s take a look at Oxy Oxidant. David Blackmon has been on this for a long time as well. Sorry, Didn’t mean to be nice to you, David, but in it, it really was important because Occidental is going after the carbon capture, which is a little bit silly and a waste of money. But they’re smart because they’re going after the other money, and that’s the green money that people are going, Oh yeah. So, you know, we need 7000 miles of pipelines, excuse me, in order to do carbon capture. And we can’t even get a pipeline from the Marcellus to New York. And Governor Holcomb is sitting there saying, oh, by the way, you get to have in, as Tammy’s just pointed out, you get to have 20% on your electricity bill this year and then you get another 20% next year. And in three years it’ll be 100% more. But we’re going to have a bunch of dead whales on the East Coast. It’ll just like David Blackmon has been doing. So you guys are all over this. Sorry,
David Blackmon [00:22:46] I have to kill again in my whole life.
Stuart Turley [00:22:48] The answer. Now I know what you’re talking to. Meghan Lapp.
David Blackmon [00:22:53] Oh, Meghan. Yes
Stuart Turley [00:22:54] No, no. You’re on the story, you’re on the story. You’re on a story about this and you’re doing great. Telling the great story of our folks. Oil companies will do what it takes to make money, but they will also change. And that is a great question. If you don’t mind me, I’m going to shut up after this, please. It is. Guys have to control me. I get so excited. And so the great oil companies will make money. But David, you talked about the flaring that has been stopped almost voluntarily by the U.S. The markets decide what’s going on. Correct? Right.
David Blackmon [00:23:36] Yeah. I mean, you know, in in the Permian, in the Bakken have big flaring problems. The industry reacted to to end it. They’ve you know, they haven’t ended all of it, but they’ve ended most of the incidental flaring. And it’s a tiny fraction of what it was just a few years ago. But to the point Andrew Munoz made, Exxon Mobil certainly will do what what it takes to make money and what ExxonMobil is doing, contrary to what General Secretary Gutierrez, advocates of just going buying a bunch of solar and wind farms, Exxon Mobil’s investing one billions of dollars in carbon capture and a big hydrogen judge Herbert Baytown and and becoming the biggest lithium producer in the United States of America in southern Arkansas. And that’s a real contrast to the approach that some other companies like Shell and BP have taken. Go ahead, Armando. Sorry.
Armando Cavanha [00:24:35] No, no, no, sorry. Sorry. Go ahead.
David Blackmon [00:24:38] No, I’m done. I’m done.
Armando Cavanha [00:24:39] Oh, yeah, I’m not sure. David, you know that Petrobras is the most important company in the world for carbon capture and the production phase. 25% of the world’s carbon capture is made by batteries. Interesting. Tell me. Please, Doctor, tell me what people will be forced to travel less and work remotely.
Tammy Nemeth [00:25:02] Yes, that’s the plan. I mean
Armando Cavanha [00:25:04] Oh, my God.
Tammy Nemeth [00:25:05] They say it straight up. I mean, I read the what? The IPCC, they had a report last year where they said these are the lifestyle changes that’s required in order to meet the 1.5 degree whatever number they pull out of there. But this year. And and it was all about, you know, you you have to not travel if you’re allowed to fly. Maybe it’s once every couple of years sort of thing. Have vacations at home. Grow your own food. Don’t eat meat or meat is a treat all of these different things and and it’s come out in the in this IPCC report quite clear what the ultimate goal is for us as a lifestyle, what our standard of living is. And so I don’t think it’s much of a shock to hear them say fossil fuels in the ground and we have to change our lifestyle. I mean, the pope came out, I think it was yesterday with his statement saying that the reason there’s climate change is because people are greedy and that nations are only looking after their own national interest rather than the global collective. And I’m thinking, so did he tell that to China? Did he tell that to some of the other groups that both Dave and Stu had mentioned? You know, like so the United States and Christian countries aren’t supposed to think of their own national interests. They’re supposed to be considering the global collective. And really, which to whom does that serve? Who does it help?
David Blackmon [00:26:36] Robert, could you put this most current comment up? Armando by Robert.
Armando Cavanha [00:26:42] The last one.
David Blackmon [00:26:44] Yes.
Tammy Nemeth [00:26:44] This one
David Blackmon [00:26:46] Will COP28 be remote next year or Davos. This is a point I made in a story last week. I mean, if there’s 70,000 people who flew in on private jets to Dubai this week with their enormous carbon footprints to participate in Cop28, if they were really serious, if this was about the environment, this conference would be being held remotely. Okay. If it was about the environment and emissions. That’s right. Would be the first thing they would do.
Armando Cavanha [00:27:20] Yes. For the 70,000 people there.
David Blackmon [00:27:23] Right? Yeah. This is about doing business. This is about getting in on the wealth redistribution, getting a piece of that multitrillion dollar, hundreds of trillions of dollar pie. And that’s what it’s about. So, no, they’ll never do any of this remotely because it’s harder to make business deals remotely.
Tammy Nemeth [00:27:42] Well, can I add one thing there? My sense is that there is a growing shift to stop the cops the way they’re currently structured, and to create a new entity that will do basically little cops all through the year on an ongoing basis with a smaller committee that has designated stakeholders and so on. There was an open letter that was brought out in February outlining ten principles of doing this, that new global climate change committee, whatever, that Mary Robinson’s a part of these elders. They put forward a proposal doing something similar. Just a few weeks ago. So my sense is that all this hype with the hypocrisy and all of that is to lay the groundwork to convince people they need a different system. And this system will exclude oil and gas companies and producing countries and so on.
David Blackmon [00:28:33] That is brilliant, actually, if that’s the plan. This is a perfect strategy to get there, right? Having an oil company in charge of the event and. Oh, wow, that’s brilliant. I haven’t thought about that. Thank you.
Armando Cavanha [00:28:46] That’s a good point. Stuart. Do you believe that that is there an agenda, a control agenda? A clear agenda to to bring close to that the energy transition?
Stuart Turley [00:28:59] Oh, absolutely. There’s an agenda. And damn, he is, as already alluded to, I mean, talked about it that five minute cities or 15 minute cities. She brought up a fantastic point of a steak treat or, you know, a rare steak that you dream about or, you know, okay, we have Bill Gates that says climate change is not real. I was just kidding. Look at that. I mean, he goes squirrel. The other thing, Bill Gates, GMO on all of the seeds in fruit have crippled and canceled seed. So if you buy oranges.
Bill Gates [00:29:40] This is COP28 Very, very important meeting. The issue of health and climate will be discussed at length. That’s never gotten the attention it deserves. The issue of food systems and how with climate change, a lot of farmers aren’t able to grow their crops, which is a tragedy for them. Talk about using innovation to absolutely solve that problem. And a lot of great young companies are here and the big companies will come. We’ll see a lot of partnerships that come out of this. So it’s a good milestone in a very big challenge.
David Blackmon [00:30:20] We flew over there.
Tammy Nemeth [00:30:22] Because fertilizers being banned.
Armando Cavanha [00:30:23] Yeah, sure. Two, three stories for you. But that was so important to to give you more more space to call.
Stuart Turley [00:30:32] Oh, he is such a squirrel. The only time I met Bill Gates, I offended him so bad he had a blood vein go across his forehead, and I wish that I had had more time with him than I did. But if you know how much of a knucklehead I am, if I can make him mad, it was a great day. Here’s the problem with him. He’s buying all the farmland in the U.S. to shut it down. He’s doing what Mark Masters and I have been talking about, and that is he’s ruining the family farms. They’re also making it so as Tammy was saying, they are making it impossible for us to have the victory gardens of World War Two so we can’t grow our own food thanks to Bill Gates. Bill Gates is a hypocritical son of a gun that I again, when I squished his hand, like I squished his hand with most firm handshake I possibly could. Maybe that’s why he had the bullet been going across. That man is evil against humanity. I’m sorry, guys. You can throw me off if you want. I apologize. I am so bad. Thank you.
Tammy Nemeth [00:31:43] Can I.
Stuart Turley [00:31:43] Can I go put myself in timeout?
Tammy Nemeth [00:31:46] He talked about this is the first time at court that they’ve had it about health, that there’s a health thing, whatever. And it might you might be interested to know that the first ever World Health Organization climate health envoy is with Dr. Vanessa Kerry, John Kerry’s daughter.
Armando Cavanha [00:32:08] Oh.
Stuart Turley [00:32:10] Oh, my. I mean, they’re so political. Rath.
Tammy Nemeth [00:32:15] But still.
David Blackmon [00:32:16] My goodness
Stuart Turley [00:32:19] She’s an honorary doctor.
Tammy Nemeth [00:32:20] No, no, no. She’s a real a real searcher in Boston.
Stuart Turley [00:32:24] Oh. Oh, my goodness. So, Tammy, you just I did not know that. That was a fabulous point. I’m going to go throw up. The reason is because if we think Foushee is the richest guy on the planet and he’s had so much money from Pfizer, we are going to get shut down. Armando, I am so sorry. You’re going to get your YouTube channel shut down. Because as you know, as we all know, you mentioned something bad about, you know, the the supposed that, you know.
David Blackmon [00:32:54] It’s okay, we have a lot of other plans.
Stuart Turley [00:32:56] Is this going to open up?
Armando Cavanha [00:32:58] I can use David’s one.
Stuart Turley [00:33:00] Yeah, I yes. I’m going to transcribe this and throw it out on energy news beats dot co. we get lots of traction, and everything I can push out from you guys goes out. Sorry.
Armando Cavanha [00:33:14] Okay. We have five minutes more because David has an appointment or an agenda interview by someone.
David Blackmon [00:33:23] Smaller caps all year. That’s the shit hitting the fan. Well, yeah, seriously. Big fan, too.
Armando Cavanha [00:33:30] Yeah. Let, let, let love go to the last point, please. Carbon credit offsetting is something that sometimes I cannot understand very well. But this market is something of a clear, fun or dirty market. Read well
David Blackmon [00:33:50] Excel. Al Gore became worth over $300 million.
Tammy Nemeth [00:33:53] Yeah
David Blackmon [00:33:55] Participating in a carbon credit scheme that, you know, I mean, some of it’s great, you know, plant trees if you want to take carbon earlier, plant trees. That’s one way to have credits against your carbon emissions is to plant millions of trees. And that’s a good thing. There’s nothing, nothing inherently wrong with that. It’s the accounting for them. that is inherently fraudulent and we all know it. And everybody a cop knows it. But, you know, after this this event is over 70,000 people and thousands of private jets flying into Dubai, there’s going to be an enormous accounting of this enormous carbon footprint. And they’re going to offset about two thirds of it with fraudulent accounting for carbon credits. Okay. And and, you know, that’s what they do every year. And it’s it’s just all a big scam. The whole thing is just this enormous scam. And you have to give them credit. It’s the greatest scam ever invented by humanity. Okay? And they’ve incorporated all the world’s governments in it, the news media, you know, And it’s just it’s fantastic. I can give them credit.
Stuart Turley [00:35:05] Let me.
Tammy Nemeth [00:35:07] Oh, okay. You go ahead. First do and then I’ll go.
Stuart Turley [00:35:11] Our beloved Ursula from the EU put out let me just read this two second quote. The EU added and later admitted that to accomplish such a goal, Brussels will need to find new sources of revenue. Oh, it’s about money. David brought that up and hit it right in the head. to do so duo.
David Blackmon [00:35:35] From shocked.
Stuart Turley [00:35:36] Oh yeah I’ve heard was fully supports the plan proposed by the Kenyan president William Ruto and French President Emmanuel Macron to impose global green tax targeting financial transitions to raise more money for climate actions. Here’s the thing. He says, We don’t need to have the 100 and some odd billion that they’re targeting per year. They need trillions. Brilliant. I’m sitting here spitting. I’m so disgusted. Sorry. Sorry, Tammy.
Tammy Nemeth [00:36:05] Well, it’s like the Tobin tax from 30 years ago, right? Where they wanted this micro charge on every international transaction that would go into some kind of global fund in order to pay for whatever global initiatives, whoever wanted. And so this is basically that same idea recycled now to say, well, we’re going to have a little micro tax or whatever on all of these different transactions which we’ll put into a green fund and then use it to redistribute wealth. And you know, Mark Carney about three years ago was having a conversation with someone about what he sees going forward, the financial services in with the transition. And he was a big promoter of nature based solutions where you could go to a developing country, ask them to preserve a forest and give them credit for it. And then those different companies would be the ones who would be paying for that, that preserving that forest. And he said, just to be clear, this isn’t government telling people to redistribute. Their wealth. It will be done privately. And it’s still redistributing wealth under the guise of, oh, we’re preserving a forest in Ecuador or something. So and I could see Brazil wanting to take advantage of this because they’ll be like, okay, we’ll preserve the rainforest or whatever, give us money, give us credit, and we won’t cut this down or that down. And and so they get the best of both worlds. They develop their oil, become part of OPEC, and they get credit for preserving rainforest if they, in fact, do so.
Armando Cavanha [00:37:38] Yup. We need another event talking about cop 28, I suppose, because there’s too much of.
David Blackmon [00:37:48] The world.
Tammy Nemeth [00:37:48] In there more will happen.
David Blackmon [00:37:50] Coming up In January?
Armando Cavanha [00:37:52] Yeah, that’s. That’s right. So today we need to close now because David is going to speak to our interview. I’m not sure about that interview. Thank you so much. Was a great pleasure. You are totally welcome. Dr. Tammy Nemeth and David Blackmon, my guru. Thank you so much.
David Blackmon [00:38:09] Thank you. And thanks for everybody who called.
Tammy Nemeth [00:38:12] Thank you.
Armando Cavanha [00:38:13] Have a good day.
The post Energy Transition #89 COP 28 With Armondo Cavanha, Tammy Nemeth, Stu Turley, and David Blackmon appeared first on Energy News Beat.
