Will Trump’s Energy Secretary Be Good For The Economy?
..for a change, someone who knows what he is doing
Welcome to Macro Mashup, the weekly newsletter that distills the content from key voices on macroeconomics, geopolitics, and energy in less than 10 minutes. Thank you for subscribing!
Macro Mashup aims to bring together the greatest minds in Finance and Economics who care deeply about current U.S. and international affairs. We study the latest news and laws that affect our economy, money, and lives, so you don't have to. Tune in to our channels and join our newsletter, podcast, or community to stay informed so you can make smarter decisions to protect your wealth.
What’s The State of the Appointments and Nominations?
I am listening to a lot of webinars about the peaceful handing over of power.
I am hosting a webinar on the topic on December 5th. I would love to see you there.
https://kit.dakotaridgecapital.com
Handing over power is a process that begins the minute the incoming President takes the oath of office.
All the people nominated for senior positions of government that DO NOT require Senate confirmation fan out through the offices of government and take over the levers of power.
When this happened in 2016, Trump was not prepared. This time he is, and he plans to hit the ground running
It’s tough to sift through all the nominations Trump has named.
Some are crazy - Gaetz and Gabbard; some are controversial - RFK, Jr. - but maybe necessary; some are inspired - Wright and Burgum.
I will not deal with Gaetz, Gabbard, or RFK, Jr. Those are beyond this newsletter.
The ones I like merit further ink.
Doug Burgum, former Governor of North Dakota and briefly Presidential candidate, has been nominated to head the Department of the Interior (DOI).
Chris Wright, CEO of Liberty Energy, has been nominated to head the Department of Energy (DOE).
Both positions require Senate confirmation.
Here’s some background on Burgum
He’s 68. He studied at North Dakota State University and earned an MBA from Stanford. He built a software company that he sold to Microsoft in 2001.
He stayed at Microsoft until 2007 and has been involved in real estate and venture capital.
He was elected to two four-year terms as governor of North Dakota, starting in 2016. He also briefly ran as the Republican presidential candidate.
While governor of ND, he committed his state to net zero by 2030.
Importantly, though, this was to be accomplished not by shutting down fossil fuels—they have a big presence in ND—but by capturing emissions—Carbon Capture and Sequestration.
As head of DOI, he will preside over millions of acres of Federal land, mainly in the Western US.
DOI decides how those lands are managed, including whether energy should be produced there and whether other activities like hunting and livestock grazing should occur. The department is also responsible for national parks, monuments, ocean energy, and conservation.
In addition, the DOI includes the Fish and Wildlife Service, which decides whether to protect species and their habitats from development.
Although Burgum is one of Trump’s least controversial picks, the reviews vary.
This is from the Center of Biological Diversity:
“Burgum will be a disastrous Secretary of the Interior who’ll sacrifice our public lands and endangered wildlife on the altar of the fossil fuel industry’s profits,” Kierán Suckling, executive director at the Center for Biological Diversity, said in a written statement. “Burgum is an oligarch completely out of touch with the overwhelming majority of Americans who cherish our natural heritage and don’t want our parks, wildlife refuges and other special places carved up and destroyed.”
And this is from the National Wildlife Federation:
“Governor Doug Burgum has often been a strong advocate for science-driven wildlife management, conservation of wildlife habitat, promotion of the outdoor recreation economy, and reductions in pollution through commonsense carbon management and appropriately-sited clean energy,” Collin O’Mara, the group’s president and CEO, said in a written statement.
“We hope he will carry these experiences to the Interior Department and provide the type of balanced, farsighted leadership that people and wildlife alike need,” O’Mara added.
Burgum will chair a new National Energy Council:
Trump announced Friday afternoon that in addition to leading the Interior Department, Burgum will head a brand new “National Energy Council.”
Trump described this new council as consisting of “all Departments and Agencies involved in the permitting, production, generation, distribution, regulation, transportation, of ALL forms of American Energy.”
He added that the council will be charged with cutting red tape, “enhancing” private sector investment, and focusing on innovation rather than regulation.
In addition, Burgum will have a seat on the White House’s National Security Council.
To the unbiased eye, Burgum seems like a smart pick and a force for good energy policy.
The fact that a National Energy Council will be created means we can develop a coherent energy policy.
A coherent energy policy integrating all energy sources, carbon-based and renewable (including nuclear) would be a welcome change from the monotony of the usual “fossil fuels bad - renewable good” chorus.
Here’s some background on Wright
Bryce is a well-respected commentator on the energy sector. He’s not in one camp or another. Instead, he supports more energy globally as the single biggest contributor to human thriving, particularly improving the economic status of women and girls in developing countries.
It’s worth a read. Bryce knows Wright well.
These are the key takeaways from Liberty Energy’s report entitled “Bettering Human Lives”:
Energy is essential to life and the world needs more of it!
The modern world today is powered by and made of hydrocarbons.
Hydrocarbons are essential to improving the wealth, health, and life opportunities for the less energized seven billion people who aspire to be among the world’s lucky one billion.
Hydrocarbons supply more than 80% of global energy and thousands of critical materials and products.
The American Shale Revolution transformed energy markets, energy security, and geopolitics.
Global demand for oil, natural gas, and coal are all at record levels and rising — no energy transition has begun.
Modern alternatives, like solar and wind, provide only a part of electricity demand and do not replace the most critical uses of hydrocarbons. Energy dense, reliable nuclear could be more impactful.
Making energy more expensive or unreliable compromises people, national security, and the environment.
Climate change is a global challenge but is far from the world’s greatest threat to human life.
Zero Energy Poverty by 2050 is a superior goal compared to Net Zero 2050
I have a hard time being anything other than in complete agreement with all of these.
Reposting the charts from last week’s newsletter emphasizes Wright’s point 6.
This rate of progress is not enough to meet the rapid growth in demand. This is why Big Tech has started to do deals with nuclear developers.
These companies are indifferent to the technology that drives their data centers, but they are not indifferent to not having the power they need.
The majority of mainstream media is a fervent worshipper at the altar of “climate change is real, and we are responsible.”
This article from the FT is an excellent example of that.
As you know from previous articles, this is not my view. All energy sources have challenges. Reducing and capturing the emissions from carbon-based energy generation is an important goal.
Equally, we need to recognize the mining-related impact of producing solar panels and wind turbines and the land use challenges of installing them on a vast scale.
We must realize that one of the trade-offs of adding substantial amounts of intermittent power generation to the grid is to make that grid more unstable.
The two pictures above show a different perspective. When every storm or fire is cited as an example of “climate change”, the media forfeits credibility on the matter.
I am not prepared to risk the economic growth we need to overcome our fiscal mess on an ill-conceived plan to power our economy with all-renewables by 2050.
Shackling ourselves to an arbitrary and unachievable temperature goal by an arbitrary date is sheer folly.
It is naive to think that we can reach a consensus on investing $100 trillion in renewable energy by 2050—an amount equal to the world’s GDP in 2023.
People need feasible goals, not unattainable goals. The American electorate has delivered its verdict on subjugation to dogmas that signal virtue but lack tangible quality-of-life payoffs.
Takeaways
Trump has thrown down the gauntlet on some controversial picks, but his Doug Burgum and Chris Wright choices are very encouraging.
The undifferentiated mainstream media reaction to these picks is a sorry indictment of its increasing irrelevance to informing rather than indoctrinating its readers/viewers.
The US's abundance of energy is a key strategic asset in strengthening our economy and managing the challenges of an increasingly multipolar world.
Failure to nurture, integrate, and harvest every energy resource available would be a strategic blunder of epic proportions.
There is no power without energy power.