Trump’s “Drill, Baby, Drill” Energy Policy Will Enjoy the Enthusiastic Support of the Global South

From THE DAILY SCEPTIC

by Tilak Doshi

The inauguration of Donald Trump on Monday, January 20th as 47th President of the United States promises to dramatically change the trajectory of U.S. energy policies pursued by the outgoing Biden administration as well as the previous two-term Obama presidency.

In a speech and Q&A session on January 7th, the President-elect stated that both climate alarmism and Biden’s energy policies are “huge scams”; that he would terminate U.S. participation in the UN’s Paris Climate Agreement; that he would rescind Biden’s cynical permitting “pause” on LNG export infrastructure development allegedly to assess its impact on U.S. energy security and domestic natural gas prices; that he would do away with Biden’s EV mandates “very quickly”; that he would “un-ban” Biden’s blanket offshore oil and gas drilling ban; that he would rescind all the actions taken by the Biden regulators to disadvantage or ban gas appliances and stoves; and that he would unwind Biden’s offshore wind boondoggle. He has also vowed to rescind unspent funds earmarked for climate provisions contained in the euphemistically named, boondoggle-laden Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

It is of course too early to assess how quickly the incoming Trump administration can achieve these objectives. Vested interests, bureaucratic backsliding and the considerable resources of the climate industrial complex will seek to constrain the Trump administration’s energy policy ambitions.

But it would be a mistake to look at the Trump administration’s energy policy promises as the only hope in turning around what has been a decades-long onslaught against fossil fuels in the U.S. and Western Europe. Key developments in world energy affairs in 2024 suggest that a Trump administration will have important allies in Europe and around the world in its fight against the globalist climate agenda.

Europe’s deindustrialisation and the green backlash

The impact of Europe’s deindustrialisation – a process that began with Germany’s adoption of Energiewende in 2010 which sought to replace fossil fuels and nuclear power with solar and wind – became painfully evident last year. Germany’s Federal Statistics Office reported on January 15th that the economy contracted for the second consecutive year in 2024, highlighting the depth of the downturn gripping Europe’s biggest economy with few signs of any imminent reprieve. The avalanche of headlines on Germany’s economic and political implosion after Chancellor Olaf Scholz sacked his Finance Minister in November were only the latest in a series of reports over the past two years on the “sick man of Europe” (“Behind Germany’s Political Turmoil, a Stagnating Economy”, “Germany Is Unraveling Just When Europe Needs It Most”, “Europe’s Economic Apocalypse Is Now”) .

Sky-high labour and business operating costs, caused by the myriad regulations of over-reaching bureaucrats and among the world’s highest energy prices brought about by the follies of the EU’s and U.K.’s “climate leadership” policies of the past two decades, have cost Europe dearly. In 2008, the EU and U.S. economies were neck and neck. Today, the U.S. economy is 50% larger than its hapless ally across the Atlantic.

A growing ‘greenlash’ against the environmental agenda in Europe and U.K. – along with the rejection of mass immigration and the open-ended commitment to funding Ukraine’s war – has led to the rise of populist “far-Right” political parties. They have achieved significant success in regional and national elections in Austria, Italy, the Netherlands, Hungary, Poland, France, Germany and the U.K.

Geert Wilders, the political leader of the Party for Freedom which is in a coalition of four parties which constitute the Dutch Government, sounded positively Trumpian as he decried government spending on the climate and supporting Ukraine and the need to reduce taxes, stating: “I want us to finally put the Dutch first.”

Alice Weidel, leader of the German AfD party that has 20% voter support across the country, making it Germany’s second strongest political party, is yet another potential Trump ally. In one of her typically fiery speeches to the Bundestag, she said: “Germany is deep in recession… And it’s not Putin, not the world, not some fictitious climate disasters that are to blame for this. This incapable Government is responsible for the collapse…”

In an extended interview with Elon Musk – who will lead the Department of Government Efficiency in Trump’s incoming administration – Ms. Weidel spoke of Angela Merkel as the first “green” chancellor who “wrecked and destroyed” the country with its “obnoxious energy policy” which made Germany “the first industrial economy that unplugged nuclear power plants”.

Nigel Farage, leader of the Reform U.K. party which is now neck and neck with the ruling Labour Party on 25% in some polls, has long been a personal friend of Mr. Trump. Like Mr. Trump and reflecting most Reform U.K. members, Mr. Farage is skeptical about climate alarmism. His party manifesto states that Net Zero policies are “crippling our economy” so “scrapping climate change goals should be made a priority for the next government as it would save the public sector £30 billion per year for the next 25 years”.

There are other leaders in the EU that share Mr. Trump’s opposition to the fundamentalist beliefs of the climate church. Hungarian Prime Minister Victor Orban dismisses EU plans to tackle climate change as a “utopian fantasy”. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has pointedly stated that “ecology has been militarily occupied from the Left” and that “Greta Thunberg’s ideology will lead us to lose thousands of companies and millions of jobs in Europe”. Parties opposed to the unconstrained green climate agenda are now in governing coalitions in FinlandSweden and Austria.

Energy pragmatists in the Global South

Ever since the first ever international forum devoted to the environment and climate change took place in Stockholm in 1972, the developed countries of the West have made climate policy a centrepiece in their international relations. From the earliest UN negotiations starting in 1992 at the Rio de Janeiro Earth Summit under the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), developing countries in the ‘Global South’ such as China, India, Brazil and South Africa had “common but differentiated responsibilities”.

This meant that the developed countries (primarily the West, but also its allies including industrialised Japan and South Korea) adopted commitments to reduce carbon emissions by specified amounts over a specified period. This was allegedly dictated by the ScienceTM popularised by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change periodic “Summary for Policymakers”. The developing countries not only did not have any binding policy commitments but were expected to receive considerable support in “climate finance” to assist mitigating and adapting to climate change.

After almost three decades of negotiations at the Conference of Parties (COP) at the UNFCCC forum, the chasm that exists between the policy perspectives of governments in the collective West and those of the rest of the world that make up 80% of the global population is no closer to being bridged. The delegations from China and India among other developing countries at COP26 held in Glasgow in 2021 successfully insisted at the last minute that the forum’s final communique refer to a “phase down” not a “phase out” of fossil fuels. This was to ensure there was no watering down of their aspirations for higher standards of living which depend on reliable and affordable fossil fuel supplies.

At COP28 held in Dubai in 2023, the contradictions between the climate alarmists of the West (which included both government representatives and a vast phalange of environmental NGOs that are accorded semi-official status at COP meetings) and the energy pragmatists of the ‘Global South’ broke into the open and was widely reported in the media.

Dr. Sultan Al Jaber, the President of the COP28 climate summit and CEO of Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, said pointedly in an interview: “You’re asking for a phase-out of fossil fuels… Please, help me, show me the roadmap for a phase-out of fossil fuel that will allow for sustainable socio-economic development, unless you want to take the world back into caves.”

Nor is Dr. Al Jabber the only natural ally of the in-coming “drill, baby, drill” Trump administration. Al Jaber’s remarks were amplified by Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman who told Bloomberg that the world’s biggest oil exporter would not agree with Western demands to phaseout fossil fuels. “Absolutely not,” he said in an interview in Riyadh. “And I assure you not a single person – I’m talking about governments – believes in that… If they believe that this is the highest moral ground issue, fantastic. Let them do that themselves. And we will see how much they can deliver.”

Last year’s COP29 was held in Baku, Azerbaijan in the immediate aftermath of Trump’s victory in the presidential elections, much to the consternation of climate activists and a hyper-ventilating media around the world. The Financial Times saw Trump’s triumphant win as “a blow to global climate action” which would “cast a pall over the UN COP29”. Azeri President Ilham Aliyev, host of COP29, came out as among Mr. Trump’s most enthusiastic supporters, describing his country’s oil and gas resources as “a gift from God” and that oil and gas would be needed for “many more years”.

Upending green geopolitics

That the upcoming Trump administration will upend the green geopolitics pushed by the progressive environmental Left in the West is in no doubt. This was evident at the confirmation hearings for key nominees in the Trump administration which took place this week. Chris Wright, an oil executive and the nominee for Secretary of Energy, said this at his Senate hearing: “President Trump shares my passion for energy… if confirmed, I will work tirelessly to implement his bold agenda as an unabashed steward for all sources of affordable, reliable and secure American energy.” He continued:

There’s seven billion people in the world that don’t live lives anything like we do…They want what we have. And of course, they should get what we have. And through market forces and improvement and leadership, particularly leadership from the President-elect Trump, I think we’re going to see growing more abundant energy resource coming out of our country and hopefully out of the world so that everyone else can live lives like we do.

Treasury Secretary nominee Scott Bessent was asked at his confirmation hearing about fears that President-elect Trump’s efforts to reverse gains made in green energy would favour China. He responded as follows:

China will build a hundred new coal plants this year. There is not a clean energy race. There is an energy race. China will build 10 nuclear plants this year. That is not solar. I am in favour of more nuclear plants. And I would note that the IRA as scored by the CBO [Congressional Budget Office] is wildly out of control in terms of spending on the upside.

Mr. Trump couches his promised energy policies in the mantle of “America First”. Yet in his ambitions to bring about a renaissance in energy production in the U.S., he enjoys the prospects of strong support from all corners of the world not beholden to the powerful lobbies of the globalist climate agenda.

Dr. Tilak K. Doshi is an economist, a former contributor to Forbes, and a member of the CO2 Coalition.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
5 20 votes
Article Rating
56 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
strativarius
January 21, 2025 1:43 am

Wanna buy some flywheels? How about waterwheels?

How climate-friendly waterwheels are coming around again https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/jan/17/how-climate-friendly-waterwheels-are-coming-around-again

God help us.

Ed Zuiderwijk
Reply to  strativarius
January 21, 2025 2:19 am

The windmill is a medieval concept, the waterwheel goes back to the ancient Greeks andeven earlier. Talk about retarded.

Reply to  Ed Zuiderwijk
January 21, 2025 3:12 am

Except rivers are far more reliable than the wind.
Hydro is a viable energy source, where the geography is right.

Reply to  MCourtney
January 21, 2025 3:52 am

Yes maybe that’s the angle – revive all those old mill towns located along the rivers because that was the only power source for industrial activity before coal, oil and gas.

Scissor
Reply to  MCourtney
January 21, 2025 4:19 am

Horses and oxen are more reliable than wind and they’re more obedient than hydro.

Erik Magnuson
Reply to  MCourtney
January 21, 2025 8:25 am

And dams provide a simple and very effective form of energy storage along with storage of water for irrigation.

Ed Zuiderwijk
January 21, 2025 2:16 am

Paris flies out of the window and Mann is depressed. It will rain climate horror stories for a while but after some time most people will realise that the weather is doing just what they always have known it doing and ignore the ranters. The ‘cause’ will slowly die as all such hoaxes have done in the past.

strativarius
Reply to  Ed Zuiderwijk
January 21, 2025 2:34 am

This is probably the most expensive “scare” of all time. And not just in cash terms.

Reply to  strativarius
January 21, 2025 6:47 am

No doubt about it.

Scissor
Reply to  Ed Zuiderwijk
January 21, 2025 4:53 am

All or nearly all of our political prisoners are being freed. Democrats and leftists, though I repeat myself, are the true threat to “democracy.”

I think we will learn who called the shots in the Biden politburo. Clearly it wasn’t Biden himself.

Gregory Woods
Reply to  Ed Zuiderwijk
January 21, 2025 6:18 am

ojala!

CampsieFellow
January 21, 2025 2:41 am

It’s great to have Trump back and to know that for the next 4 years, at least, energy policy will be decided on a realistic and appropriate basis. But let’s not get too excited. We’ve already had a period of four years of a Trump presidency. And then what happened? Biden not only undid all the good work of Trump but made things far worse than they had been when Trump became President. So will the next four years be just another short pause in the mad dash to energy lunacy? Only the election of another Republican President in 2028 committed to the same policies of Trump will avoid that disaster. And again in 2032.

Reply to  CampsieFellow
January 21, 2025 3:09 am

Musk for President?

cwright
Reply to  galileo62
January 21, 2025 3:41 am

“Musk for President?”
Stranger things have happened. I strongly support his campaign to take mankind to Mars.

Although I don’t agree with all his beliefs, he is almost certainly a genius.
In the past he was a green fanatic. His first success, Tesla, was largely based on climate fear mongering. However, I suspect his views may be more moderate now, probably a necessary thing if he is to remain an important part of Trump’s incoming government.

I would be very interested to hear Musk’s current views on climate change.
Chris

Reply to  cwright
January 21, 2025 6:56 am

“I would be very interested to hear Musk’s current views on climate change.”

Me, too.

I would also like to know what every Republican, including President Trump thinks about climate change. Do they think CO2 can change the Earth’s climate? I’m looking to identify the lukewarmers who think CO2 is a problem that needs to be addressed. We’ll need to send these people for a long talk about CO2 with Dr. Happer.

John Hultquist
Reply to  cwright
January 21, 2025 11:45 am

His first success, Tesla, …”
That was not his first success. Neither was it his idea. He does get credit for recognizing the massive $$$ in subsidizes to be had.

Reply to  galileo62
January 21, 2025 3:53 am

Two terms of Vance should do nicely.

abolition man
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
January 21, 2025 7:54 am

Vance/Gabbard 2028! Ain’t America great, again!

Reply to  abolition man
January 21, 2025 11:03 am

How old will Barron Trump be in 2032 ?

Scissor
Reply to  galileo62
January 21, 2025 4:22 am

Musk is ineligible as he’s not a natural born U.S. citizen.

1966goathead
Reply to  galileo62
January 21, 2025 1:34 pm

He can’t, as he was not born in the US.

Reply to  CampsieFellow
January 21, 2025 6:53 am

“Only the election of another Republican President in 2028 committed to the same policies of Trump will avoid that disaster.”

At this moment in time, I think the new Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, would have the inside track for the next president. Of course, four years is a long time in politics.

I would like to see President Trump assign Vice President Vance with some serious tasks to see how he performs.

I know more about Marco Rubio than I do about J D Vance, so that’s what I’m basing my opinion on favoring Rubio now.

January 21, 2025 3:17 am

This article needs to learn the difference between supporting authoritarian warmongering and opposing wasteful actions on climate.

The fact that several right-wing leaders in Europe would gladly surrender to Putin does not necessarily make them role-models for Trump.

I may be wrong. Trump may poop himself and run away. But he’ll have to deal with the aggressors one day.
The world ain’t big enough for the USA to hide anywhere.

And the Tech Bros will not take kindly to the fabs in Taiwan being abandoned. Deterrence is better than war.

Reply to  MCourtney
January 21, 2025 7:01 am

I don’t think Trump is going to run from anyone.

Deterrence *is* better than war. But sometimes wars are inevitable. In that case, you have to go to war.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 21, 2025 7:16 am

Abandon Ukraine and it’s a greenlight for China to forcibly re-unify with Taiwan.

Make the invasion costly for Putin’s Russia and it’s shown to be not worth China doing anything, at the moment. They are willing to wait a century for the right time, as they did over Hong Kong.

Why choose to make that time to be now?

EmilyDaniels
Reply to  MCourtney
January 22, 2025 3:44 am

What on earth are you talking about? Not only is this comment completely off-topic, it seems to be divorced from reality. Who’s talking about abandoning Ukraine? I was in support of assisting Ukraine back when the invasion started, but only if the U.S and Europe went in aggressively to win it quickly and decisively. In the following years, however, it’s become clear that the war has been intentionally dragged out to last as long as possible to feed the global war machine. How does an endless war of attrition help anyone, especially Ukraine? Lowering global oil and gas prices and providing other sources will hurt Russia because those are their greatest sources of income

Reply to  EmilyDaniels
January 22, 2025 4:07 am

“Who’s talking about abandoning Ukraine?”

Leftwing propagandists and the dupes who believe them.

Reply to  MCourtney
January 22, 2025 4:06 am

“Abandon Ukraine and it’s a greenlight for China to forcibly re-unify with Taiwan.”

Trump isn’t going to abandon Ukraine. That’s leftwing propagada.

Trump was the one who sent Ukraine anti-tank missiles, when all Obama and Biden would send them is blankets and pillows.

abolition man
Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 21, 2025 7:53 am

In modern times wars only seem to be inevitable when the Pentagon and State Dept. hear that their military industrial handlers need to increase revenues!

tilak doshi
Reply to  MCourtney
January 21, 2025 11:32 am

Who said anything about “gladly surrender to Putin”? Why this phobia about Putin? The article was about climate and the use of fossil fuels.

Reply to  tilak doshi
January 22, 2025 4:09 am

It’s not a phobia about Putin, it is a phobia about Donald Trump.

January 21, 2025 4:45 am

BRAVO! Trump EXITS Paris Agreement and VOWS to end EV mandates | MGUY Australia
Energy common sense returns to the US with President Trump Mk II. Leaving the Paris Climate Agreement (again) and vowing to repeal the punishing EPA tailpipe emissions rules and finally, allow auto makers to make the cars people want once again.”



Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
January 21, 2025 4:53 am

What I’m wondering is- how will President Trump’s actions effect the woke state climate policies. (NY, CA, CT, MA, etc.) Can’t they continue to try to force their Net Zero laws on their population? Of course federal subsidies will end. And there will certainly be ways to discourage wind turbines at sea on federal land. But some of the woke governors are so fanatic, they’ll probably continue with their policies- unless of course they’re voted out of office. I’m not sure that’s likely in Wokeachusetts or Kalifornia. Will it take a Supreme Court decision to terminate my state’s law saying I can only buy a EV after 2085?

Scissor
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
January 21, 2025 5:00 am

The shitshow is being franchised to states like those you mention. Freer market forces should help to level the playing field for citizens, e.g., voting with their feet. Interesting times.

January 21, 2025 5:17 am

The Times They Are A-Changin’

Bob Dylan

Duane
January 21, 2025 5:34 am

While there is inevitable bureaucratic resistance to any change, Trump, along with Elon Musk, has opened up with a barrage of actions equivalent to “flooding the zone” or the German blitzkrieg in 1940 that can quickly overcome such inertia. Going for gradual and incremental change is too easily resisted, and tends to reduce or eliminate the perceived benefits of change such that voters get disillusioned and switch sides again.

So I don’t want to sound like Pollyanna here, but I do believe there is a great opportunity now to kill once and for all the green energy monster, not just here in the US but worldwide. The US IS the leader of the free world – all other such nations look to us for leadership. If we produce concrete benefits, look for other nations to follow our lead and do the same. That is in fact already happening, with left wing governments dropping like flies in Euro elections this last year (including Germany and Italy), and is about to happen in Canada, France, and inevitably also in the UK.

Reply to  Duane
January 21, 2025 7:07 am

“While there is inevitable bureaucratic resistance to any change, Trump, along with Elon Musk, has opened up with a barrage of actions equivalent to “flooding the zone” or the German blitzkrieg in 1940 that can quickly overcome such inertia. Going for gradual and incremental change is too easily resisted, and tends to reduce or eliminate the perceived benefits of change such that voters get disillusioned and switch sides again.”

Trump said last night that when he makes changes to how these federal agencies operate he is going to have a person assigned to see that his Executive Orders are carried out immediately.

Trump said his experience is that bureaucrats drag their feet over implementing changes, but he is not going to let that happen this time.

Richard Greene
January 21, 2025 5:47 am

Mr. Doshi is confused

Drill Baby Drill is just a political slogan that gets conservatives all excited when Trump says it. Trump can do no wrong to MAGA supporters.

Of the 175 (out of 195) nations that really do not care about CO2 emissions, the desire for lower oil prices varies. The oil and gas industry in oil and gas exporting nations does not want lower oil prices. Oil importing nations most likely do want lower oil prices.

Drill Baby Drill accurately describes the US oil and gas industry under Biden. In 2023 US set records for oil production, gas production, oil exports and gas exports. If that is not drill baby drill, then what is?

Mr Doshi also seems excited about the prospect of Trump impounding unspent funds of the wasteful Biden IRA. That actio would be unconstitutional and what one would expect from a dictator. Congress passed the IRA. Do we want a president to arbitrarily cancel any legislation he does not like by impounding the funding approved by Congress? If so, we would have a fascist nation and a dictator, not a constitutional republic. Mr. Doshi seems to want such a dictator. Shame on him.

It is a disgrace that conservatives will accept actions by Trump they would NEVER have accepted from any Democrat president. Republicans are hypocrites.

Ed Zuiderwijk
Reply to  Richard Greene
January 21, 2025 6:49 am

It’s good to see you approve of the policy.

Reply to  Richard Greene
January 21, 2025 7:12 am

“It is a disgrace that conservatives will accept actions by Trump they would NEVER have accepted from any Democrat president. Republicans are hypocrites.”

Sounds like TDS to me.

What actions are you condemning that Trump gets away with, and Democrats are criticized for?

In other words: What are you talking about?

Richard Greene
Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 21, 2025 7:46 am

Trump has been in office one day so the dictator like talk is just talk so far. But now is the time for small government libertarians like me to speak up:

Potential Trump Dictator actions

Use US military to mass eport illegals

Use CIA ro find illegals

Mass deport without due process of law

Seize Panama Canal

Buy Greenland that’s not for sale

Make Canada 51st state

Impound unspent funds for any legislation Trump does not like

Force Israel to trade 2000 hostages for under 100 hostages

The Tic Tok ban on free speech is up in the air so far –this was the first attempt at non-secret government internet censorship.

I’m sure there are more.

But you don’t care if Trump actually becomes a dictator as long as he does what YOU want him to do.

The fact that Trump never mentions working with Congress does not bother you at all?

I will respond to what Trump actually does.

He is a blabbermouth who makes a ridiculous number of promises that could OLY be accomplished by a dictator.

I don’t like Democrats or Republicans talking like dictators.

Biden acted as a dictator with his 1500 political prisoners. And secret pressure on social media to censor some stories. And arbitrarily cancelling student loans. And the lawfare against Trump and MAGA supporters.

Talking like a dictator may not lead Trump to act like a dictator. Maybe it’s just talk? if so, that bully talk is just dumb.

Reply to  Richard Greene
January 22, 2025 4:21 am

“Talking like a dictator may not lead Trump to act like a dictator. Maybe it’s just talk? if so, that bully talk is just dumb.”

Well, I am of the opinion that the way Trump talks will not lead to a dictatorship, and the way he talks gets people’s attention, and gets them to thinking along the lines that Trump wants them to think, and this leads to good outcomes for the United States.

Trump always offers the worst case scenario first. This shocks some people and they end up making a deal that is not a worst case scenario for them, and so they feel good that Trump didn’t drop the hammer on them, and Trump and the United States feel good because we got a better deal than we had in the past.

So your major complaints about Trump are for his possible future actions.

Happily for my psychological health, I trust Trump’s judgement. I don’t think there is a dictator hiding in there. I think he is going to do another good job. Give it time and maybe you will change your mind.

abolition man
Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 21, 2025 7:52 am

RG probably still believes the “Fine People” Hoax and that Hunter’s laptop was just a Russian intel op! You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him think; especially when ALL the information he gets is “adjusted” by the corporate media complex!

Reply to  abolition man
January 22, 2025 4:31 am

Right before the 2020 presidential election, 51 Swamp Critters from the “Intelligence” community wrote a public letter saying they thought Hunter Biden’s laptop was an example of Russian Disinformation.

This, of course, was a blatant lie. There was no evidence of Russian involvement and these people knew that the FBI had verified that the laptop belonged to Hunter Biden. The FBI had been in possession of Hunter’s laptop long before the letter came out in October 2020, just before the last presidential debate.

And in that presidential debate, Trump raised the issue of Hunter’s laptop and Biden was quick to point out the letter from the 51 intel agents claiming it was Russian disinformation. And then the leftwing moderator of the debate wanted to quickly change subjects, and Biden got away, temporarily, with another lie.

Yesterday, among the Executive Orders Trump signed was one that revoked the security clearances of all the 51 people who signed that letter. Security clearances are important to these people. Some of them make their living dependent on their security clearance. They don’t have a security clearance anymore. They brought it on themselves.

Congress should, and probably will, investigate these people. They interfered in a presidential election using an orchestrated lie.

D Sandberg
Reply to  Tom Abbott
January 22, 2025 10:52 am

Not everyone knows that and the TDS inflicted like RC who know it won’t admit it.

Scissor
Reply to  Richard Greene
January 21, 2025 7:57 am

We are all hypocrites. Give him a chance. You should be aware that Trump puts things out to get a reaction or as a basis for subsequent negotiations, even to be sacrificed if you will. Most often there is a workaround.

For sure he’s going to face legal challenges, but he’s less than 24 hours into this term and I see very little not to be happy about.

Reply to  Scissor
January 22, 2025 4:37 am

“Give him a chance. You should be aware that Trump puts things out to get a reaction or as a basis for subsequent negotiations”

Exactly.

J Boles
Reply to  Richard Greene
January 21, 2025 1:35 pm

Republicans are hypocrites? Leftist projection.

Duane
Reply to  Richard Greene
January 22, 2025 4:41 am

You fail to mention that the reactionary leftist Dems hated the rising US production levels of oil and gas and were doing their damnedest to slow or stop oil and gas production. Or didn’t you notice that Biden just put the entire Gulf of Mexico/America and the Atlantic basin off limits for future oil and gas exploration and production … and refused to issue permits for LNG export shipping facilities, and whose EPA tried to effectively ban fossil fueled transportation by implementing impossible to achieve emissions limits on manufacturers and wasting countless billions if not trillions on subsidies to failed green energy projects and EV manufacturers.

You really didn’t notice any of that?

Your comment makes about as much sense as in that old joke, whereby a guy jumps off the top of a skyscraper, and as he passes a window as he heads down someone yells, “How’s it going?”, and he replies “So far so good!”

D Sandberg
Reply to  Richard Greene
January 22, 2025 10:42 am

Anyone with the slightest understanding of the workings of the U.S. government framework understands that the Presidential powers are limited. When a President proclaims he will do this or that what he is really saying he will “encourage” the House and Senate to approve whatever (including the use of some serious “arm twisting”). Sadly, few voters have “the slightest understanding” (see above).

John Hultquist
January 21, 2025 8:43 am

Chris Wright TOP PHOTO is the oil executive nominee for Secretary of Energy

January 21, 2025 11:44 am

When Mr. Doshi refers to the “vast phalange of environmental NGOs” is he referring to their attempts to put their thumb on the scales?

Bob
January 21, 2025 1:28 pm

Our main concern considering energy and transportation is spend money on stuff that works. Wind, solar, battery and EVs don’t work. Stop wasting our money on them. Fossil fuel, hydro, nuclear and internal combustion vehicles do work. Spend money on them. This is not a complex issue.

Edward Katz
January 21, 2025 2:09 pm

The US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement should indicate it, along with the COP conferences, is on its last legs and should be making plans for burial. Both generated suspicion from their outset, and as time passed and few, if any, targets were achieved, they became obvious that they were nothing more than charades that were just driving up consumer costs in almost every country. And when those same consumers were reminded that the worst emitters had no intentions of abandoning fossil fuels and damaging their economies, they quickly became fed up with governments that kept trying to insist that a climate crisis existed when this was an outright fabrication. So fortunately the US has a leader who will help speed up the demise of the climate con job and stick with energy policies that are both affordable and actually work, and never mind the alarmism that has only generated skepticism.

January 22, 2025 5:49 am

He also said that he would halve the price of oil by his policies, that clearly won’t happen since the producers would lose money on every barrel produced! That’s why in his last administration he got Saudi Arabia and Russia to reduce their production and cause prices to increase so that US producers would produce more. He also said that he would increase the strategic petroleum reserve which Biden was already doing.

D Sandberg
Reply to  Phil.
January 22, 2025 11:03 am

Half the cost of complying with onerous government harassment in the guise of regulations.