Ceiling the globe's future in terms of the climate religion they're pressing down upon us.
Yeah, yeah, right, twenty nine years in counting. You know, none of the major leaders are attending this year, and it's in Baku, I know.
And apparently the head of the leader of the country views petro oil and gas as a gift from God. And how dare anybody tell him that he's not allowed to extract that and get it out to the world, a world which demands and uses these products every single day to survive.
Yes, absolutely, And you know, Brian, I think the wheels are starting to come off of some of the more left leaning versions when it comes to comes to energy. Right.
It's just you can write Greta Thunberg.
Off, Well, you know, she's going to be out there, and she's going to be out there for a while, and I suspect we'll look back on this time and go, huh, we listened to a.
Hysterical twelve year old.
Yeah, yeah, that was actually a create.
Emotionally, she's still twelve emotionally.
Well in the creation of her parents and left leaning organizations right as the poster child.
You know, I've mentioned that before. I have never ever bought into this nons I still call it nonsense that you know, given all the ebbs and flows of the global temperatures over the millennium, I mean, we've had the Earth. It's just you cannot just stop and one day say all the other climate changes that this globe has experienced, just we're on their own, and then immediately say well, as of the global or after the Industrial Revolution, it's all on us now we are responsible for every weather
event that comes our way. Yeah, just nonsense. We're going to look back on this and I hopefully laugh at ourselves. We have been victims of the biggest global scam. P. T. Barnum couldn't have thought this up in his wildest dream.
You know, it is green. The only thing green about it though is the money.
Yeah, global wealthy distribution. This is how they characterize it.
Absolutely and yeah, it is part of that sort of that global elitism. And you know, quite frankly, what's been
very difficult for me to understand. And last Friday at Hudson we had an all day conversation with our friends from Canada about North American energy independence and how we can continue to link up on certain things, is that it is difficult for me to believe that in this day and age we would have politicians and administration that would give away unilateral disarmament of what could be our number one strength in the country, that is our energy independence.
No question about it.
So today, you know, the landscape has changed a little bit post election, and I think if we look at the new president, the new administration of Donald J. Trump, we're going to see a return to a lot of
different things. But one of those is to restore American energy independence and replace subjective criteria with objective criteria, meaning that the president wants us to have energy that is available wherever and whenever we need it, and that it is more affordable than what we have seen here as of late.
In other words, solutions that are good for America, regular consistent energy supply at a price that does not put us into bankruptcy. Interesting concept of that.
Well, it's common sense, right, and I think that.
The world we used to run on things like that. Now I know there's always been winners and losers being chosen by elected officials. Thus it has ever been but I mean it's I don't think it's any ever been any more egregious than in connection with this so called Green New Deal type stuff.
You know, Brian, I don't doubt that at some point in the future we will have energy. We will continue to have new emerging energy resources that result in fewer emissions and not just you know, we're so fixated on CO two, which is point one four of one percent of the atmosphere. But you know, there are other gases, there are pollutants, there are things out there that will
continue to work on. But you know, the America has reduced if you want to keep score, America has reduced its greenhouse gas emissions and CO two greater than any other industrialized country by just being smart and making some common sense decisions. Nuclears on the rise, We talked about that a lot last last week. Even fission is on the horizon with with several demonstration machines coming out before the end of this decade. So that energy mix is
going to change. But there is no reason, and I know the new president believes there is no reason to tie your hands behind your back and jump in the deep end of the pool, while China says here, good gully. Another two coal places popped up this week. That's so weird. How did that happen.
Yeah, and I think that I saw that sight. It is one of the reasons some of the countries aren't attending this. The Global cop twenty nine is for that reason alone. You know, Wait a second, why I'm over here cutting my throat, bust to my hump, reducing my available energy. Look at Germany has almost put itself into bankruptcy over this. One of the most powerful economic engines in the world has now been reduced to sort of ashes. And over this the zero carbon emissions crap.
It is, and it just goes to show that great countries can take a wrong turn that is literally fueled by this religion.
It is religion, it is.
And you know, meanwhile, the other thing I'd love for us to keep in mind that China wants to see us unilaterally disarm and I don't mean just the military, but I mean economically. And so for example, when we have a new pharmaceutical company try to spin up in America, China dumps pharmaceuticals in the US to kill that new startup. This is how these people roll, and they want our auto industry to go away. They want us to be dependent on them because people that are dependent are weak.
Well, and they will create dependence because it's all ready cheaper to do business in China because they have no environmental rules, they have no OSHA protections, they have nothing by way of the rules, regulations and things that we in hurdles we have to jump to even stay in business. So, of course, and by making us back ourselves or cut our own throats as I like to call it, and rely on windmills and soul panels that we parenthetically have to buy from them that don't provide us an abundance
of energy. Back over to where we are with Trump going forward, We've been through the other stuff. What are we going to see legitimately going forward here?
Brigham, that's a great question. I think we can first look at his first term energy policy, which is focused on achieving what he calls energy dominance, and that's prioritizing domestic production, deregulation of the industry, which adds substantial cost. And we don't think about that. But all these federal regulations, and some of them, quite honestly, are pretty silly. They don't add value, but they add to the cost of everything we buy and a shipped away from these climate
agreements like the Paris accord. These priorities are going to be emphasized along with the energy independence, economic growth, and national security. It's that simple.
Well, including the Strategic Petroleum Oil Reserve. I'd like to think we might start filling that up, although I saw Biden paying lip service to doing that again after he trained it in the name of trying to get himself elected.
Yeah, you know, it's been drained to our lowest level in decades and two. I think yes, And some people argue, well, we don't need it any longer because we have a lot more domestic production. But you know, if something hits the fan, so to speak, you don't know, and you know you don't to drain your bank account when you don't know what's around the corner, with especially how volatile geopolitically the world is today.
Well, isn't that the point? I mean, we're all told, I mean, federal guidelines online will tell you at least have several days of non perishable food in your home just in case that's not quite enough. I don't ever want to use the non perishable food that I have stored away for that day. I don't ever want that day to come, but there it is, just in case, it does, and that gives me peace of mind. That's isn't that the strategic drolling Oil Reserve.
It is, and it was originally envisioned to give us ninety days worth of supply, and to be fair, nobody's actually gotten it to ninety days because welvish million barrels a day. That's a lot of oil, but less than a couple of weeks. That would make me nervous.
And if we go with nuclear and we have modular nuclear reactors, one size, kind of fits all platform, those can be built not for billions and billions of dollars over a period of fifteen years of rules and regulations, they could go online rather quickly by comparison to way we have to go through now. If you get rid of these ridiculous regulations.
Yeah, it sure does. And I think you will see, especially with the announcement yesterday of AVEC and Papa Elon as I like to call them, the Doach team. I'm excited. I'm excited.
I'm so happy about that. They're going to hit the ground running with the scissors and they're going to cut wherever they possibly can. And you know what, I don't think there's a man, woman, or child in America that'll even notice the loss of those government jobs, with the exception of the families of those who no longer have jobs in government.
Yeah, I think you're absolutely right. And back in the Navy days, Brian, we call that a target rich environment.
No question about it. And getting rid of the Department of Education. It really has not been around since. I mean, it was the Reagan it was the Reagan era, was a Carter administration thing. But we live without the Department of Education. Up till that long in our country apparently was able to live, thrive and survive and prosper pretty damn well.
Yes, And you know, while I'm not an expert over there, I can tell you that since the Department of Education has been around, we have only lost standing. We've only slipped in the in the world polls of highly educated people. So, you know, a lot of these cabinet agencies people think have been around, No, no, no, you know it was the Department of War, Treasury, Commerce, and not even commerce there,
but the Coast Guard and you know things. A lot of these agencies came into being in the sixties and seventies. And once you create it, even if you solve the problem, they don't leave. And if you don't solve the problem, they only get bigger.
No quote. And they're not in the jobs in the business of solving problems. They solve a problem, they're out of a job. That's not what they're all about. Why it doesn't work anyway, brig him accown. I wish we could talk longer. Hudson Institute. And you're gonna be part of the administration right with energy policy?
Oh well, we'll, we'll. There's a rumor, but.
I that's not a no. That's not a no. I'm gonna take that as a definite possibility. Bringham. It's wonderful to have you on the show and have access to your intellect when it comes to energy policy. We're doing again, very very soon.