FROM MANHATTANCONTRIAN
Francis Menton
Over the past two weeks, President-elect Trump has been quick to announce his picks for the Cabinet and other senior positions. The announcements include Trump’s nominees for the three top positions in climate and energy policy: EPA Administrator (Lee Zeldin), Energy Secretary (Chris Wright) and Interior Secretary (Doug Burgo Tom). In this post, I’ll take a first look at the nominees.
There is no doubt that these three Trump appointees will achieve greater results than the Biden administration officials they will replace: Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Michael Regan, Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm and Interior Secretary Deb Haaland progress. The three outgoing Bidens are ardent climate warriors who fight every day to limit the development and use of hydrocarbons, thereby making America weaker and making Americans poorer. Putting them in office is like putting the country's energy policy under the control of its greatest enemy, the Cabal.
But is there anything about President-elect Trump’s nominees for these positions that we should be at least somewhat worried about? Unfortunately, the answer is yes. My main topic of concern is the so-called “all of the above” approach to energy policy.
But first the good news. Zeldin, Wright and Burgum are all-time proponents of lifting restrictions on the development and use of hydrocarbon fuels, letting governments off the hook and allowing that sector of the economy to thrive.
Of the three, energy secretary candidate Wright is the most outspoken supporter of fossil fuels. Wright currently serves as CEO of Liberty Energy, a major player in the “fracking” business of developing oil and natural gas resources. Today, an article in Politico's E&E News calls Wright a “fossil fuel evangelist.” A previous article from the same source a few days ago (November 18) quoted some select remarks from Wright, including his statement: 'There is no climate crisis' and net-zero emissions targets. “It's both impossible and inhumane.”
Burgum is the nominee for interior secretary and currently governor of North Dakota, the third-largest oil-producing state. As governor, Burgum presided over the rapid and continued development of the state's Bakken shale formation. The Hill quoted Burgum’s pledge in a Nov. 15 article: “Unleashing America's Energy Dominance” These words echo those often spoken by Trump. At the Interior Department, Burgum would have the power to open large swathes of federal lands that were off limits to development under Biden.
Zeldin, the nominee for EPA administrator, has a worse record on energy issues than the other two. His previous major service includes eight years in Congress, from January 2015 to January 2023, representing eastern Long Island. At the end of that period, he gave up his congressional seat and ran unsuccessfully for governor of New York (but lost by just 6 points, 53-47, in that very blue state). Newsweek noted in a Nov. 11 article that he is a “longtime opponent of climate regulation” who received very low scores from the League of Conservation Voters during his time in Congress and is a candidate for governor in 2022. During his campaign, he promised to raise new climate regulatory standards.
So far, so good. However, all three nominees were more or less influenced by prior acceptance of so-called “all of the above” energy policies and other plans to combat the “carbon emissions” demon.
What’s wrong with “all of the above” energy policy? The idea is that governments should promote all forms of energy—not just fossil fuels, but everything else, from nuclear to hydro to geothermal to “renewable” wind and solar. I published a post on this topic on November 2, just before the election. In that article, I pointed out that while “all of the above” sounds obviously correct as an energy policy, there’s actually a big problem:
In fact, “all of the above” is code for continued and ever-increasing government subsidies for energy programs that not only don't work, but drive up consumer costs and drive people into poverty. Under this banner we are developing a vast corrupt industry of uneconomic energy producers that rely on endless ongoing and increasing destructive subsidies. Ending subsidies could bankrupt these industries overnight, so you shouldn't be surprised that they're prepared to spend billions buying off politicians to keep the benefits flowing.
So where do Trump’s three nominees stand on this issue?
Start with Burgum. He became the governor of North Dakota in 2016. North Dakota energy profile from EIA:
The state's wind power generation more than doubled between 2015 and 2023. The state ranks sixth nationally in wind energy generation.
The problem here is that wind energy requires massive government subsidies and drives up electricity prices by not being able to replace reliable generation.
This article in The Hills has this to say about Burgum:
As North Dakota Governor, Burgum Set goals for 2021 The state will achieve net-zero emissions by 2030. . . However, his plan to achieve this goal does not include abandoning fossil fuels, the main driver of climate change. Instead, Burgum said he wants the state to use carbon capture and storage technology, which prevents planet-warming emissions from entering the atmosphere, to reduce or offset their emissions.
Burgum comes across as a smart guy. He should certainly be smart enough to understand why carbon capture and storage (CCS) is less economical. Well, at least CCS subsidies are no longer his purview as interior minister.
Zeldin also has a somewhat mixed record on climate and energy issues. From the Newsweek article linked above:
Zeldin has expressed varying views on climate change and environmental policy throughout his political career. . . . [H]e has supported a number of renewable energy initiatives, such as expanding the solar investment tax credit and studying offshore wind potential. . . .
These “Solar Investment Tax Credits” are exactly what make “all of the above” energy policy an economic cancer. Again, I think the good news is that issuing or reauthorizing such subsidies would not be within EPA Administrator Zeldin's authority.
The person primarily responsible for handing out huge subsidies and research funding will be the Department of Energy's Wright. Of the three Trump appointees discussed here, Wright has the strongest record on moving “all of the above” and is an outspoken opponent of wind and solar energy in particular. The Nov. 21 Politico E&E article linked above quotes Wright on wind and solar energy:
[H]He believes the government has gone too far in trying to promote a green economy by subsidizing renewable energy. “I think the catastrophic mistake the government made was that the vast majority of their funding and subsidies were not spent on research, not on improving technology,” Wright continued. “They are deploying politically popular, low-energy-density, intermittent, unreliable energy sources that will only destabilize our power, make energy more expensive, and don't really serve as meaningful solutions in the future. prospects.
But there are various other energy schemes seeking government subsidies under the “all of the above” heading. Politico E&E quoted Wright (referring to former DOE grants official Julio Friedman) as saying:
“The work Julio has done on carbon sequestration, next-generation nuclear energy, next-generation geothermal technology — that can play a meaningful role in the future,” Wright said.
It's CCS again. No one makes it work, and probably no one can make it work financially, but it just keeps popping up again and again, seeking government subsidies.
How about as an energy policy for the incoming administration: The government repeals restrictive regulations, ends handouts, and simply lets the private sector develop whatever energy source is most efficient or profitable possible.
Relevant
