[[{“value”:”
Weekly Daily Standup Top Stories
Why Kamala Harris Would Be A Total Disaster For American Energy
The Biden-Harris administration’s whole-of-government war on energy perpetuates a very bleak vision of our nation’s future. President Dwight Eisenhower once declared that “pessimism never won any battle.” Yet, many Americans are understandably pessimistic these days. […]
Offshore Wind Decimating Sea Life—Fishermen Accuse Biden-Harris Admin Of Cover-Up
With the support of the US government, the wind industry is killing whales and other sea life and ignoring warnings from marine biologists. Over the last three years, we have been documenting the […]
Italy’s central bank backs helping poorer countries fund energy transition
ROME, Sept 16 (Reuters) – Italy’s Central Bank governor Fabio Panetta on Monday threw his weight behind a plan to help poorer countries reduce their carbon emissions, saying it would ultimately reduce the overall cost […]
Canada and Mexico Boost Competition for U.S. LNG Exports to Asia
The U.S. North American neighbors are emerging as the latest competitors of the United States to ship LNG to Asia, the world’s biggest and most important LNG-importing region. While U.S. LNG development has suffered a […]
It’s time to follow the Navy’s 50-year safety record of nuclear power generation
Delivery of affordable, abundant, reliable, clean, and emissions-free electricity to customers is very important to modern quality of life. Achieving this is threatened by a vulnerable grid and the intermittency of wind and solar electricity […]
Relying on electricity interconnectors adds to market risk
Last week the Global Warming Policy Foundation has published a short report I wrote in the use of electricity interconnectors in the GB power market. Aimed at a lay audience, the report sets out the […]
Highlights of the Podcast
00:00 – Intro
00:51 – Why Kamala Harris Would Be A Total Disaster For American Energy
04:02 – Offshore Wind Decimating Sea Life—Fishermen Accuse Biden-Harris Admin Of Cover-Up
06:38 – Italy’s central bank backs helping poorer countries fund energy transition
08:55 – Canada and Mexico Boost Competition for U.S. LNG Exports to Asia
10:58 – It’s time to follow the Navy’s 50-year safety record of nuclear power generation
13:45 – Relying on electricity interconnectors adds to market risk
15:43- Outro
Follow Stuart On LinkedIn and Twitter
Follow Michael On LinkedIn and Twitter
– Get in Contact With The Show –
Video Transcription edited for grammar. We disavow any errors unless they make us look better or smarter.
Stuart Turley: [00:00:10] Hello, everybody. Welcome to Energy News. Beat daily. Stand up. This is the weekly edition. Today is Saturday, the 21st. I hope you are having an absolutely wonderful day. Please take your time and prepare a little bit because we may have some grid outages. We never know when we have disasters or anything. It’s always great to be prepared. The staff is going to put together our stories. Michael and I have been busy. We have had a great week with a bunch of different stories out there. So sit back and enjoy and I’m turning this right over to the staff. Have a great day. ;. [00:00:51][40.8]
Stuart Turley: [00:00:51] Why Kamala Harris would be a total disaster for American energy. And Michael, let me tease this story up with a line in here out of this story. This story’s out of The Daily Caller. And people don’t understand that in 2019 and 2019, building on the incredible innovations of the shale revolution and the pro energy policies of the Trump administration, the United States became the net energy exporter for the first time in nearly 70 years. At the same time, the country had the largest net reduction of energy related carbon dioxide CO2 emissions in the world. Throughout the Trump administration, the United States also reduced air pollution by 7%. You can have your energy and you can claim here and you can do it together. The reason I like this article is because I agree that it is going to be a disaster for the consumer, for American energy policy. [00:01:56][64.8]
Michael Tanner: [00:01:57] Yeah, I think this headline is a little bit deceiving. If I were to write this headline, I would say why Kamala Harris would be a total energy disaster for the American energy consumer. Because I do think what’s going to happen is oil prices are going to maybe not go to $150. I think that’s a little bit of you know, over here, I’m I’m being crazy. But I do think you’re going to see usually 80 to $95 oil and that from a consumer standpoint, it’s not going to help out inflation. You’re going to see higher prices at the grocery store. [00:02:26][28.8]
Stuart Turley: [00:02:26] Exactly. [00:02:26][0.0]
Michael Tanner: [00:02:26] Contrary to what people think, higher prices at the grocery store have a lot to do with the transportation costs of getting that food from one place to the other. It’s not just the inputs going into the food itself. It’s actually diesel to the grocery store. You’ll also see extremely higher prices at the pump. I was driving around today $2.50 cent gas. Now, that’s the that has more to do with some of the refinery stuff. It’s also partly due to what we’ve seen in the last week with oil prices. So, you know, one thing you’ll never hear out of these, you know, oil executives sitting over there in Midland, you know, at the Houston Petroleum Club are up here at the Dallas Kroger, they will never tell you that secretly they would love nothing more than $95 oil. Now, they would probably come out and say, well, that just means our cost of services are going to go up. Our margins aren’t going to necessarily stay the same. I call baloney. I think secretly they’re all sitting there like, Hey, if Trump wins, we’re going to have less regulation. We’re probably hopefully going to see service costs go down because inflation will come down a little bit and all that’s what’s really hurting our margins. But if Kamala wins, we’ll see higher prices and continue to make our nice margins. So I think ironically, the S&P companies think they’re in a win win. Now. You can’t just look at it. And that’s a very as I said in the intro, Stew, That’s a pretty selfish look if you’re an operator. But what do you as an as a CEO and as their oil and gas company, your job to that’s your only focus is. [00:03:50][83.6]
Stuart Turley: [00:03:50] Values and you make a. [00:03:51][1.0]
Michael Tanner: [00:03:51] Lot of money. So if I’m a consumer standpoint, it’s it’s going to hurt tremendously. There’s going to be pain at the pump. You’re going to see higher prices, restrictive oil and gas drilling. It’s going to be really tough. You bet. [00:04:02][10.9]
Stuart Turley: [00:04:02] Offshore wind decimating sea life. Fishermen accuse Biden here and Edna’s cover up. Got to give a shout out to our buddy there, Michael Shellenberger. Love him. Why now be in part because the recent collapse of a giant wind turbine, which I covered with David Blackmon Irene is love and family name is on the energy reality off the coast of Massachusetts, which scattered, jagged pieces of fiberglass. Take a moment. This video is an outstanding video. When the offshore wind developers came commercial, they’re now not able to find lobster, they’re not finding fish, they’re not finding all of these things. But, Michael, I did not know until I started getting into this and following Michael Shellenberger, the microplastics, how much wind farm material actually gets into the fish. It’s not just the dead whales. And I know that you don’t mind a dead whale or two, but it’s actually all of the fish in the microplastics is huge. [00:05:00][58.0]
Michael Tanner: [00:05:01] Well, we’ve decimated our our fish population, not necessarily from the wind farm, but just from overconsumption, overfishing, all that stuff. Yeah, I mean it. It’s clear I’m no fan of the whales, and this might be the one positive byproduct of offshore wind. The microplastics, I think, are interesting, though, from the standpoint of, you know, that’s something everybody can agree on. I read some stuff the other day. We eat a credit cards worth like a credit card, thin and wide world of plastics every single year. And I mean, think about everything you buy comes in plastics and you know, a lot of the food you eat is directly sourced from the. I think it’s interesting. There’s a great graph. I don’t it’s not on it’s it’s in the source article. It’s not necessarily in here, but they show a graph of the whale population. I mean, it’s completely crashing. That slope is massively downward. We lost eight last year, you know, down from 348 to 340. The lifespan of these whales are going down, thank goodness again. But I think it’s interesting that the fishermen who generally you would consider clearly as environmentalists are trying to bring this to the attention of anybody who will listen and nobody will listen only when it’s politically convenient do people care about the environment. I think that’s the overarching thing to remember here, is that it’s only politically convenient to talk about the environment when it favors you, when it doesn’t. Mouth shut. [00:06:21][80.2]
Stuart Turley: [00:06:22] And I and I and I just really am tired of it’s about pollution and energy poverty. If you married good policies to end energy poverty with the environment, we would have low cost energy. [00:06:35][13.6]
Michael Tanner: [00:06:36] We would. We absolutely would. [00:06:37][1.0]
Stuart Turley: [00:06:38] Italy’s central bank helps poorer countries fund energy transition. Bill Hockey I’m sorry, I just had to do that one. I love that in Animal House and it is absolutely applicable here. Financing transition projects in emerging market and developing economies ease. Michael Just for those uneducated guys like me can be twice as expensive in advanced economies, Panetta told at G7 international agency IAEA conference in Rome. The resources would be more than offset the economic damage avoided from the climate change would suffer. This is bullcrap. They are missing the boat. Why don’t we export the West’s great technology of clean coal, burning natural gas and reduce emissions and teach that and then make money with the poorer countries instead of making money on the poorer country. [00:07:42][64.1]
Michael Tanner: [00:07:42] I look at it this way. This is a basically here’s the thing. You’re not going to get economic energy output from building this stuff. Okay? So hopefully because this money is just going to be get distributed to companies to build the infrastructure, Hopefully those companies are based in these poor countries. They’re not going What will most likely happen is large multinational companies will come in, they’ll bring in multinational workers, and none of that money will actually flow into the country other than they will be stuck with this all the higher cost energy when they should have probably just built natural gas. Even if natural gas multi conglomerates come in and build a natural gas infrastructure, at least you end up with cheaper power, whereas this you’re going to end up with higher power and no jobs. That’s I mean, I’m not against just injecting money into a poorer economy might as well I mean we we there could be worse things but I’m down to give you know but I would disagree there’s a great way to do it. [00:08:44][61.4]
Stuart Turley: [00:08:44] No, this is and this is a typical deal that is going on with the West to the poorer countries. It is ludicrous and the wrong way to do it. So Canada and Mexico boost competition for LNG, for U.S. exports to Asia. This pretty cool. Canada could potentially supply 36.2 million tons of LNG per year by 2040 and Mexico another 36.7 million tons. That’s a lot of LNG. [00:09:20][36.4]
Michael Tanner: [00:09:21] That’s a large part of LNG. I think they’re getting on I think they’re getting in on that game relatively because we’ve seen now the LNG export facility ban get lifted and they’re there now. There’s a global competition. It’s the great part about allowing us to participate in the global market allows us to take a lot of the natural gas that’s stored up here and shale but elsewhere. Now from a security standpoint, I like all the natural gas here because we need cheap energy here. Yeah, those people out in west, you know, those oil and gas producers who are selling negative, you know, negative differentials to Waha. But joke’s on. [00:09:55][34.1]
Stuart Turley: [00:09:56] You. Yeah, I’ll tell you, though, and I want to just talk to any Sierra Club. If you’re a Sierra Club out there and you’re head still not exploded by having more LNG exporting around the world, come talk to us. We want you on a. Gas rule would be nice to hear. And you ask real questions. Do you want the lower pollution around the world? Then let the U.S. export LNG and put an end to coal plants where they have an import facility? [00:10:24][28.4]
Michael Tanner: [00:10:25] No, absolutely. I completely agree with you. You know, if and you know, specifically with Canada and Mexico trying to boost their output, I mean, this is this would be great for Mexico, to be honest with you. Mexico needs to find ways to increase revenue. And this would be a great, great way to do that. [00:10:42][16.1]
Stuart Turley: [00:10:42] Right now, their number one export is human trafficking into the U.S.. Yeah. Right. I’m kind of disgusted at this point. It was funny, though. [00:10:50][8.5]
Michael Tanner: [00:10:51] You’re hilarious, too. You’re hilarious. Follow him on X phones, I guess. That’s. That’s the perfect place to advertise your X account. [00:10:58][7.3]
Stuart Turley: [00:10:58] It’s time to follow the Navy’s 50 year record of power generation. This is an outstanding article by Ronald Stein. He is a friend of the show. He is an author. And I have had the pleasure of talking to Ronald several times on the podcast and on other podcasts as well too. Let’s go through the numbers. Today, about 440 nuclear reactors are in operation around 32 countries and Taiwan, with 62 reactors under construction as of August 1st, 2023. The United States has 54 nuclear plants, with 93 Operation Kirn nuclear reactors in 28 states. These plants operate and generate 20% of our electricity in the United States. That is impressive. 93 commercial nuclear reactors in 28 states or 20%. That’s a big number. As of May 2024, there are 214 nuclear permanently shut down nuclear reactors around the world. The United States recorded the largest number of shut down with three one unit. Holy smokes. Another seven reactor retirements have been announced through 2025 with total generating capacity of B. These being shut down is 7109MW, equal to 7% of the net nuclear fleet. Holy smokes. Consistent and reliable power delivery is a national security issue and a quality of life issue. People and economics have grown to depend on electricity so much they can no longer have alternative methods to place and replace heat, light, food preservation, air conditioning in the event of a power outage. So economic electricity must be delivered to people 100% of the time or serious disruptions in their lives and economy will be apparent, including a loss of life. This is not recycling. Slightly used Nuclear fuel and fast breeder reactors will solve these problems. And I love it. I think that we need to look at these kind of solutions. This is an outstanding article. And for the Electrician, there’s a one hour video with Chris Powers and Robert Bryce at Power Hungry as they discuss energy powered nuclear and fossil fuels. Outstanding job. Well done. And this is great. The links are in the show notes. [00:13:45][166.2]
Stuart Turley: [00:13:45] Energy security for countries is critical. Relying on electricity interconnectors adds to a market risk. You’ve got to control your energy future and control your energy grid. In its 2023 Future scenarios. National Grid is so energy said to manage the phone call periods, dispatchable thermal power plants, gas and or hydrogen depending on the scenario, are likely to be required. A combination of the compressed air, energy storage and liquid energy storage. L.A. East pumped hydro storage pages and interconnectors will all be required to manage the network during these periods. One thing out of that paragraph that is not being told is the cost. The raw cost of that paragraph is incredible interconnect or incredibly expensive. The storage mechanisms that they were talking about are incredibly expensive and it would be a lot cheaper just to use natural gas and a lot less impact on the environment. Ofgem has identified electricity exports as a source of consumer dis benefit. One might assume that the country. For which countries prop up our grid with exports might realize this is bad for their domestic consumers and have a rethink. What you put in a grid interconnect between countries and then you expect that you’re going to rely on another country’s fiscal responsibility. That’s a that’s not something I would want to do as a leader of a country. Interconnects are bad for energy security and long term plans, in my opinion. [00:13:45][0.0][805.0]
– Get in Contact With The Show –
The post Week Recap: Kamala’s Policy Impact, Offshore Wind Risks, and LNG & Nuclear appeared first on Energy News Beat.
“}]]