Guest essay by Eric Worrall
h/t Breitbart – White House National Economic Council director Gary Cohn has just re-opened the US Government’s war on coal.
Gary Cohn Relaunches War on Coal: Fuel from America’s Heartland ‘Doesn’t Make Much Sense Anymore’
White House National Economic Council director Gary Cohn, a former Goldman Sachs banking executive, has reopened the U.S. government’s war on coal in direct contravention of directions from President Donald Trump.
“Coal doesn’t even make that much sense anymore as a feedstock,” Cohn said in Europe on Air Force One, while speaking for the White House to the press, the New York Times’ Brad Plumer noted.
“Natural gas, which we have become an abundant producer, which we’re going to become a major exporter is, is such a cleaner fuel,” Cohn continued.
Trump adviser Gary Cohn a bit off-message on Air Force One, per pool report: “Coal doesn’t even make that much sense anymore as a feedstock" pic.twitter.com/0QLXZOik6k
— brad plumer (@bradplumer) May 26, 2017
…
Frankly I’m getting very disappointed about this kind of thing. The Trump Presidency is supposed to deliver the straight shooting leadership we’ve all been waiting for, the White House administration which doesn’t have to be continuously reminded about the President’s campaign promises.
A chief economic advisor who despises coal has no place in the government of a President who expects future support from coal country.
I am hoping that my disappointment in The Donald is only temporary.
I am hoping that he is just getting himself organised before he brings out the flamethrower.
I am hoping really, really hard.
Even God won’t be able to help us if I am wrong.
Ted Cruz would have been a far more effective President at standing up to ecofasc1sm than Trump. Cruz has ideals and intellect which Trump lacks – Trump doesn’t know or care much about the climate issue, for him it’s a political pawn to be traded. Cruz understood climate science and the pseudo-science behind AGW as well as AGW’s nascent fasc1stic tendency.
For Trump climate was just another campaigning sound-bite to attack the establishment, but he had / has probably never given the issue serious thought.
Cruz would have lost.
And knowing that he would have lost, Cruz would NOT have been a more effective President than D. Trump.
Goldman Sachs has been a cancer on our economy ever since the Clinton Administration. Bush II, Obama, & Trump have all placed Goldman execs in senior economic leadership positions despite rhetoric which opposes such things. Hillary (of course) planned to have Goldman in charge of the economy. We all hoped that Trump would be different.
Matthew Taibbi — “The Great American Bubble Machine”
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-great-american-bubble-machine-20100405
“Goldman Sachs has been a cancer on our economy”, not just your economy, they are a world wide cancer.
Ah yes, from Rolling Stone… you couldn’t ask for a publication with more integrity, right? Somehow a $40B company has its finger on the button that controls all of the world”s $127T economy. Yeah, I’m not buying it. The only people that hate Goldman Sachs are people that also hate capitalism.
I hate Goldman Sachs because I love capitalism.
Goldman is the essence of crony-capitalism. Hank Paulson with his “I need $700B to save the world by buying troubled assets” didn’t buy any troubled assets but he did prop up a company that insured companies that owed Goldman a lot of money. Lloyd Blankfein and Paulson were on the phone so often people thought they were in love.
Want to guess where New Jersey’s worst governor got his money? How about New York’s tyrant mayor who gave Goldman a billion dollar tax exemption to build an office in New York. He did this while raising everyone else’s property tax. Where there are government favors being traded, there is where Goldman dwells.
Goldman Sachs is what capitalist haters point to when they denounce capitalism. Goldman is less capitalist than Vladimir Putin.
Matt Taibbi was the best writer on the economic meltdown, in part because he was one of the few non-partisan writers. Most people tried to demonize the Republicans or Democrats in their post-meltdown analysis. Most economists and bankers and partisan politicians had a story to spin (kind of like climate change.)
Don’t pretend for a second that the magazine that he writes for is bad just because it is a rock magazine. Rolling Stone has some good articles and quality journalism. His point is that you can’t consider a statement from any current or former Goldman-Sachs executive as anything other than a siphon more money out of your pockets & into theirs. If he’s against coal, it is because Goldman-Sachs is short on coal futures.
If you think Goldman-Sachs is only a $40 billion company, you are sorely mistaken. With commodities futures, they can control enormous markets with a small investment.
https://www.ft.com/content/15649fbc-ea39-3d1e-9bea-5d0944013098
Bear in mind that, prior to the Clinton administration, banks like Goldman were not even legally allowed to speculate in commodities. It was Clinton’s final law (passed after George Bush had been declared a winner) which made it legal. Now Goldman-Sachs is one of the largest commodities brokers on the planet. They make money from the volatility in commodities. When the price of oil rises, it is because they are long on oil. When it drops, they sold it a few months ago (and sold oil futures).
Remember, commodities are not like the stock market. They are “zero sum” games. If somebody makes money in the commodities market, then somebody else is losing money. This is Matt Taibbi’s “massive pump and dump” scam.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2017/02/22/goldman-sachs-gives-green-light-for-commodities/#665c3e7c6eaa“
http://money.cnn.com/2014/11/20/investing/goldman-commodity-manipulation-wall-street/
Y’all worry too much…Words are just …words. Action is all that matters…
I think a lot of people are over reacting. What counts are the actions the administration takes and not the words of some advisor. Let us see what the POTUS does or does not do and make him hear our opinions. Remember that as important as getting the chains of government off our energy sources and elimination of the tremendous waste on “green energy” is, the president was not elected because of one issue. There were many reasons why I voted for Trump and my determination on if I will continue to support him will based on many issues, not one. I would also remind those wringing their hands here that they should remember what the alternative to Trump as POTUS was.
Excellent points…
Why can’t they just take their hands off? Until we’re all using nuclear, it’s still going to be an important fuel.
Reminds one of what Matthew 6:24 would be in the Trump era: “No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both Trump and money.”
Cohn, a Goldman Sachs investment banker, is true to his roots.
Given the type of person Trump is, it was/is completely predictable that by the time his presidency is over a lot of the people that voted for him are going to be thoroughly disappointed.
In democracy you just get what you elect. The best never make it too far in politics.
We have to take into account that bean counters raised in Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and the other banking outfits are very good at financing wizardry and complex derivatives. But they are very weak when it comes to solid themes. This guy in particular seems to be very short sighted, thinks the USA can increase gas consumption, export lots of gas, and that somehow it won’t run out. Gas is precious. Wind power and coal are strategic “extenders” of a resource that eventually we will deplete.
I think you may be misconstruing that statement, it may not be diappointment President Trump, but in his support network, who contradict his Campaign promises and statements.
Your consistent negativity shows that you re “anti-Trump” whereas I am pro-Trump.
AC,
I am not American and couldn’t care less who is your president. Judging from the outside you had very poor choices in the last presidential elections. It is very hard to think that you couldn’t find two better candidates among >300 million people. Something is not working as it should in the selection system.
I agree with Javier. Trump is a disaster as president, but Hillary would have been just as bad or worse. Trump was nominated mostly due to his outrageous statements during the campaign which received a lot of press among the 16 Republicans running for the nomination. He was not the best candidate, he was the most outrageous. Hillary was nominated because she had the Democratic party apparatus in her back pocket.
We need to find a better way.
Javier,
Who in their right mind would want to be president? It is largely a thankless job where you have to endure abuse from the Media, the more so if you are a conservative. About the only upside is the opportunity to become rich and/or have one’s ego stroked. There is the old joke that “Republicans become rich and go into politics, and Democrats go into politics and become rich.” But, yes, those with principles get beat down by those who are the swamp dwellers.
G7 has failed to come to any agreement on the climate change. Trump has other priorities.
I’m not sure Trump knows what he’s doing. Seems to be unfit for the job. Maybe he’ll get bored and quit? Pence can do a better job.
I find it amazing that anyone still trusts the liberal media to actually tell the truth about anything…
And not only that, Trump does not agree with most of the other G7 leaders in basic questions of climate warming (like the share of man’s guilt p. E.). It is not just a formal, but a fundamental question. In our unity press here in Germany this fundamental dissent is swept under the table and only referred to Trumps economic side. But Trump also has a conviction about climate change. And he stays with this. This can no longer be denied and it slowly seeps into the understanding that this person (as well as the vice pence) has a different scientifically based opinion on climate change. Of course, he did not elaborate this scientific basis himself, Trump is not in a position to do so. But he certainly trusted unfamiliar consultants in this question. Like all other leaders with different opinions. These people have also not worked on this issue.
The most efficient electricity production now comes from the combined cycle natural gas power plants. Lowest cost, 24/7, cheap natural gas, low emissions, fully scalable to any size, reliable, small footprint, back-up role only if you want.
It is just the best energy source especially now that fracking has opened up so much more resources in so many places.
True, we should export all the coal to places that do not have access to NG, like Africa..!
Does not matter.
Let the market force or ease out coal. Do not do it by fiat be presidential decree or back door regulations by taxing carbon, etc.
My industry uses coal but does not burn it.
Until it is no longer cheap. Then what? Coal?
This Cohn needs to be fired immediately .
You might have seen clip of pres. Trump at the NATO meeting shoving out of the way the PM of Monte Negro. You might think that I, as a born a bred man of Monte Negro, would find this as unacceptable or offensive. Not a bit.
https://youtu.be/vIdrTSjzGKY
the poor little country (pop 600k) has same clique of the supposedly ‘reformed’ communists running this quasi-democratic (to be generous) since 1990, making it 27 long years, and people never managed to get rid of the lot (they ‘win’ every election by 51%)
Vuk
Thank you for the video….Hilarious……..but there I came across another one, not real actually as this one but still hilarious.. a minutebuzz one, french one…..About the Pope and Mr. D.J.Trump and fiddling hands..:)…Very fanny and hilarious..
🙂
Cheers
If you look closely Trump is not shoving the PM out of the way. Trump puts his hand on the PMs shoulder and the PM smiles at Trump and ushers Trump around him with his right arm. Look closely and stop the film if necessary… it happens quickly.
Oh please. Of course he shoved him out of the way. How on earth is a guy who is not even looking at Trump when Trump begins to push past him going to be ushering him around him?
I’m convinced the endgame of all this is to make energy so friggin’ expensive that a program will be started to subsidize low income users “as a basic human right” paid for by “the 1 percent”. Put Wall St on a strict energy diet of panels and pinwheels only and see how they like it. See if their trains run, their data and server centers function, their cars and taxis and Ubers…
Your specific idea has already been tried in Holland’s France. While waiting for the administrative processing of their energy bill reimbursement applications, the poorest burned green wood and rubbish to keep warm. The outside air was freezing and better not inhaled. The administrative solution was halving highway speed limits. Then the weather warmed and suddenly no reimbursements were necessary.
Natural gas does out compete coal. For now. It is his apparatchik view on wind and solar scams that is disturbing.
Let the market decide.
But do not skew the market by taxing CO2.
Nice fake news 🙂
1) he’s the White House National Economic Council director NOT the Chief Economic Adviser
2) everyone stop getting your panties in a wad every time some 2 bit member of the administration says something the least bit suspicious …
3) the guy didn’t say War on Coal … he said nat gas was cleaner … thats it … lighten up Francis …
When Trump does something against Coal you can get concerned … until then chill out …
Wall Street runs on gas, nuclear and hydro. FACT. Can we prefer engineering and cost facts to opinions here? I am in the UK, which has different but not very dissimilar decisions to make, although our remaining coal is deep and expesnive to extract, we can get it cheaper from the cheap over supply on the high seas.
?dl=0
That will mainly fuel indigenous fuel poor developing economies. It is the 3rd World fue of choice. So yer man Cohn is sort of right, for a developed economy with masses of shale gas as the US.
In the USA it is the case that clean, low CO2 (60% less than coal) high thermal effecieincy (50% more than open cycle combustion at 60% thermal efficiency) CCGT gerneration using shale gas makes a lot more sense than coal, while avaiable. Same in UK, or anywhere with shale gas under them, now extractable at a competitice price per unit energy with almost no real environmental impact.
Coal is still most energetic and cheapest fuel per unit enrgy, but we don’t have to burn it and it is has a ot of pollutants, that burning rocks produces. We can get to cleanest, safest, cheapest, indefinitely sustainable and zero carbon if it matters nuclear using the breathing space (deliberate pun) gas replacing coal provides us, while nuclear replaces both. All thta we have intense enough to deliver after fossil.
A great example is New York State. Check out what they have actually done and plan – gas, nuclear and hydro 94% of supply – 4 New nuclear plants in their plans,. Pretty much what makes technical sense as I describe above. Admirably pragmatic. Literally the way to go in the NE for sure. And in fact solar in desert States is only acceptable and viable if it can deliver better than nuclear w/o subsidy on LCOE, with its massive environmental impact, material resource and land use per KWh.
PS Wanna know how much energy it takes to build a global empire? Apparently there was as much carbon under the UK at the start of the industrial revolution as coal, as was under Saudi Arabia as oil. We used it to fuel the industrial revolution , construct our infrastructure and supply a global Empire. The lesson is obvious.
Less and more expensive energy means less prosperity, and all the other things that brings – health, education, the rule of law, happiness. With plentiful and affordable energy all can be enjoyed – unless you use the valuable freedom and spare time plentiful cheap enrgy and technology provides unproductively, to become an eco worrier, of course.
There is a song of by Christina Aguiiera….Fighter,,,,,,,,one that very well may synchronize and sink with these blog post mood about “smart” and “evolution”….
Jborn, if you find it appropriate, please do consider the “hassle” of posting it…:)
thanks…
cheers
Sorry, for the mistake, meant and supposed to be addressing, “JBom” instead as put above “Jborn”…..
In the same way that it’s a thing that “spooks” never retire / leave – bankers seem to always have their finger in the pie….
It’s something that has repeatedly featured in public affairs in Europe as well as the US – there is obvious utility in using bankers but the spectre of conflicting interest has repeatedly taken physical form…
China needs our hard coal to reduce pollution at their coal-fired plants. All the scrubbers in the world won’t clean their domestic soft coal.
Nothing good ever comes out of Goldman Sachs. This guy included.
Cohn is proof of the hallucinogenic properties of DC swamp gas. It’s a good thing that Trump leaves the area for a breath of reality once in a while to touch base with the people who put him in the WH.
Here’s to hoping that he’ll promise to adopt Ted Cruz’s sensible plan to gradually end corn ethanol mandates and subsidies when he visits Iowa next Thursday. After all, Cruz still beat Trump despite a platform to end this ethanol nonsense.
If Trump starts kowtowing to his elitist lib roots he’ll be nothing but another one term wonder.
I am here on a fool’s errand. Actually I just like the phrase and rue that people use it only to bludgeon others. Breaking with tradition I declare my own self, thus! Such a catchy ditty, once this message is posted I’m sure I’ll like the very look of it. Perhaps I’ll hang it on the wall.
[??? .mod]
“Trump declines to join world leaders at G-7 in affirming Paris climate accord”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/27/trump-declines-to-join-world-leaders-at-g-7-in-affirming-paris-climate-accord.html
Now he needs to formally reject it. Before an enviro group shops for a Judge to impose an injunction on the same extra-legal grounds corrupt Judges have used to stop him on other issues.
Let’s look at what he says without emotion.
“Natural gas, which we have become an abundant producer, which we’re going to become a major exporter is, is such a cleaner fuel,”
He is touting NG as a money making export throwing in the clean stuff as a selling point.
So now the questions is, where is HIS money invested? NG no doubt. Perhaps everyone should go long on NG while you still can.
Make the playing field level between ALL possible sources of power generation and let the market decide. I suspect that if that happened coal would be the fuel of choice in some places and NG in others and nuclear in others. Hydro is pretty well maxed out and some if not many of the alternative fuel source generators would go by the wayside. When it comes to peaking stations for electrical power generation though NG will remain the fuel of choice. A gas turbine can come on line very quickly, and even former coal fired units that have been converted to use NG can come on line considerably faster than a coal fired unit. So with the pricing being what it is NG is going to have a big place in the sector.
I would agree in sentiment but we all know that the powers in charge will keep their own interests in mind when making policy.