🚀 Coming VERY soon... Real Vision is launching a groundbreaking new learning experience for everyone who wants to be a better investor. Join the waitlist to get first access, discounts, and updates - plus get immediate free access to a special 5-part email series from Raoul Pal, taking you behind the curtain on how he invests 👉 rvtv.io/3IJtmOl
A great presentation. One favor, if I might, please stop using the word noble as the reason for this projected transition by 2030. In its most favorable light, the people responsible for this non-doable and economy killing timetable are misguided and profoundly naive. Most lifetime politicians are most likely incapable of appreciating the seriousness of the topics that you just presented.
I totally agree. Ignorance, gullibility and wishful thinking do not make one "noble." We do face a grave crisis, but it is from energy depletion, not the carbon dioxide boogeyman. I am astounded that even education and wealth do not prevent people from being herded like cattle into what ever politically motivated pseudo - scientific fad that politically influential strategists want to promote, and that the commoners cannot see through the stupidity of the upper classes but are convinced they must be profoundly intelligent individuals who know exactly what they are doing. Our world is populated by idiots and fools, which may be fine for a society of serfs and lords as we were a few hundred years ago, but today it is leading us to disaster.
"Really smart money is not putting $$$ into Energy Transition" Thanks so much Wil and Kyle for a real banger ! Both of you are very humble despite your expertise.
amazing you guys didn't emphasize the true problem point. EROEI (energy returned on energy invested). Shale and tar sands and fracking and deep deep sea drilling require miles of steel and oceans of diesel returning only as little as 3:1 returned energy,for energy expended to extract.....this, compared to the old straight well drilling returning 50:1 IS A HUGE CHANGE on new petroleum sources Also, compressing and shipping LNG uses up over 25% of the BTU value of the energy in the gas. Coal to liquid fuels may soften the crash a bit, but the world's energy supply will implode, and with it the productivity of the economy, productivity of agriculture, and worst of all, the waste of war as we battle over remaining reserves. Third world famine, refugee crisis, war and revolution will exacerbate this predicament.....going to be an interesting century
I'm glad somebody sees the big picture. The big question should be how does mankind power down with as little grief as possible, because we are not going to drill our way out of this (although we should not stop drilling), nor are we going to plug the gap with renewables and nuclear (although that does not mean they may not be useful). We should slow the decline as much as possible, but the idea that we are going to prevent it and thus maintain the current or similar level of civilizational scale and complexity is a delusion. One place we should make a huge investment is in conservation, because slowing down depletion should be a huge priority. Another should be in looking for ways to incentivize decentralization. Decentralization will happen eventually, so better it be as orderly as possible. And continuing to expand our population through immigration? That is just insanity. We should freeze our borders until we get to the other side of this transition, not to high energy renewables which is not going to happen, but back to a much lower energy world with a lot more poverty. It will happen, it is just a question of how disorderly and dangerous the transition will be, and whether we will transition to an egalitarian republic with widely distributed capital, or a highly stratified social order characterized by highly concentrated capital ownership.
"We need bigger government bureacracy to solve these energy problems, problems that were created by giving so much power to NGO-controlled government bureaucrats!" *shakes head*
Great interview. I do think that Americans aren't objective. If China is subsidising the solar sector so the prices are cheaper, why can't the US do something similar ? Between Iraq & Afghanistan, the US spent $6t. It's more about priorities. Rather than trying to divide the world into democracies and autocracies, the US is trading with the Saudis who are the greatest autocrats. Let's have a level playing field.
Yes, we spent a lot of money in Iraq and Afghanistan - more than we could afford! That was a huge waste of real resources, and the added debt is something we are paying for in terms of diminished real economic growth and foregone domestic consumption. Subsidizing solar would also make us poorer. Subsidies don't make anything cheaper, they just disguise the costs by moving them elsewhere. Consequently, society misallocates resources because it lacks true price signals. If energy prices are high, then society needs to invest in conservation, not subsidies. Subsidies are a form of lying. I have absolutely no qualms about trading with autocracies unless they pose a credible threat to our own security, as Communist China does, but not smaller countries. Russia is not only not a threat to the US, it is not even an autocracy. It is sort of like the countries in Latin America, in both cases cronyistic democracies with a lot of corruption (which is NOT the same thing as autocracy) and also a similar GDP per capita. But more important, its values and way of life are fundamentally compatible with our on in a way that Communism is not. China also has a similar GDP per capita, but a huge population, and it is a true autocracy built on political and moral values that are utterly incompatible with those of the West. Disturbingly, some Western leaders (Justin Trudeau is one example, by his own public admission) view Communist China as a model to aspire to. I think they would reconsider if we could bring about the downfall of that totalitarian model. Russia though is a real democracy but badly implemented, which is usually the case in poorer countries. Recently there are disturbing signs that the current government of the US wants to go down the totalitarian path. Let us pray a course correction is still possible.
@Digital Cash Cow For the same reason that cryto currecies are doomed. They are wishfull thinking backed up by lots of hype. The plans have no real value. They are grand in their world outlook, but practically they are completely useless. Green energy just does not work for most of the worlds population. I am all for it, but it is not technically developed enough yet to be a world solution. To go anti conventional power sources now is more a zealot thing than practical. The same goes for cypto it is full of zealots. It is simply not energy efficient now. Zealots think that we must stop current energy and money and go all in on new technology which is simply not mature, packed full of fraud and dishonest claims.
it's hard to get people who want to go green just how much energy goes into it. in a way you are pre paying your fuel. it's a much higher upfront cost than close to free fuel with usually minimal running costs. i think we have to really start to force the people that want to shut down fossil fuel extraction to really provide detailed plans on how they want to replace 10 million barrels of oil per day. get them to pick the location where the solar plant will be built, the routing of the high power lines etc. We need to make them understand how little they know about the energy system, how hard and costly the transition will be, and how the western world's obsession with not building anything is hampering the transition to renewable energy. we need mines for all the minerals required to make green tech, we need to rebuild our electrical infrastructure to move towards electrification of transport and replacing gas for heating and cooking etc. i don't see the Grettas of the world willing to engage in a rational discussion.
The beauty of Marxist critical theory is you don't need to put forth your own plan. Just focus on and dramatize the negative aspect of whatever you wish to attack. Everything has pros and cons. If you just jawbone the public with cons, of course that public turns against it.
We don't have a way to replace 10 million barrels of oil per day (I think it is higher than that - I have read here and there that the US produces about 12 million a day and uses about 20 million), but whatever the number, we can replace very little of it with electricity for various reasons.
If there are people in this world you should pay attention to what they are saying; these two guys are are worth it. I wish our world / US politicians were as curious, smart, wise, prudent as these two dudes.
If Americans stopped driving round in 5 litre engine cars you could save a huge amount of oil. The standard in most other countries is 1-2 litre engines. It’s clear at this stage the US only produces ridiculously large engines to protect its own industries. The speed limit is only 60 mph for goodness sake. I can comfortably drive at that speed in a 1 litre car let alone a 5.6 hemi bigger than a house. Wake up people
Much worse now!!! going off Exxon numbers we don't see MASSIVE increasing in O&G investment say zero by 2030 global production will drop to 30Mmbbls per day
Two points: I find it curious that as earth’s magnetic shield is weakening by the decades, TPTB are doing everything they can to get us all more (not less) dependent upon the electric grid... 🤔 Also, while various energy sectors bicker about fracking, turbines , solar, etc.. there are confirmed Black Ops UAPs zig-zagging around the planet, defying gravity while diving in and out of the oceans. What energy are THEY using?
@@atrothe Ostrich with head in sand. Denying Black Ops tech and earth’s weakening magnetic shield won’t make them “pretend” no matter how hard you try.
They are prioritizing efficiency over robustness. This will end traumatically if we don't find a reverse gear. But as far as advanced aerial technology, I don't doubt that it exists, but I don't think it "defies gravity," and those stories about diving in and out of oceans don't convince me at all. You need more skepticism. There is both a lot of hoaxing in the UFO/UAP community and a lot of gullibility. And I do mean a lot. Frankly, you should believe every story you hear or see about it is either a lie or a misunderstanding until proven otherwise. That way you will be right between 99% and 100% of the time.
Thats probably true that it will take many decades to get off fossil fuels, and that with current tech maybe 40% of energy comes from renewables in 2050. Thing is every time I hear oil and gas people say that....thats with todays technologies. Obv we need some tech breakthroughs that can speed things up. We also need to consider nuclear as part of renewables.
While the big picture is complicated and will be challenging to say the least, you can take your own personal energy needs into your own hands fairly easily. While its not for everyone, with a few skills and about $15,000, you can build your own battery backed solar power system to power your home and an electric car. You can create your own individual energy independence and be free of any price hikes and shortages that may come along. Very knowledgeable and interesting talk. Now I am even more happy about getting off the grid when I did. Thanks!
I appreciate your intentions, but 98% of people are incapable of doing that. Moreover, that $15k will only last 5-10 years max before having to reinvest the same amount. After all, it would be built with cheaply made Chinese imported junk. Its hard to see any positive return on such an inve for the few even capable of making it.
@@movinon1242, I agree that most people can't afford this but there are still millions that can and those that can are those that use the most power. I don't know where people get the idea that solar only last 5-10 years? That's just not true. You can expect your solar panels to last 25 years and beyond. They lose about 0.5 to 1.0% per year of operation. LiFEPO4 batteries currently last 18-25 years and they are getting better all the time. For me its hard not to see the return. Your gaining energy independence! You won't have to worry about oil shortages, price hikes or loosing power due to outages. Self sufficiency is peace of mind. A system like this pays for itself pretty quick and then your running on free power for another 20 years.
Odd they both say they are against government involvement in our private lives yet also say government should use national security as excuse to build transmission lines...
Transmission lines to those places where there are lots of wind, BUT never stop to ask whether wind turbines can actually satisfy our energy needs (answer: no, they can't, for a number of reasons).
The graph showing tremendous increase of metals use is showing GREEN TECH's increase of use. Globally, copper mining will need to increase from 21M tons (2020) to likely about 26M tons. Nickel from a global 2.7M tons (2021) to likely about 4.7Mtons. Graphite from a global 1M tons to likely about 3.6M tons. The chart could be mated with a chart showing what increase is required for "all uses" global production.
Kyle you faked me out. I was ready to critique the lack of discussion on nuclear power, and Wil did that. One of your best because I kept taking notes for the future. Nothing like two smart Texans - kidding; we know there's never two smart Texans in the same room. From an old Texan, thanks.
I thought you were pro America until you said to repeal the Jones Act and then you lost my ear. So, basically, you want government support for all the businesses you have a commercial interest in and you want to outsource those industries that are your input costs, like bulkers, tankers and carriers. You don't want to help America, you just want to help yourself. FO!
maybe America should clean up their own act before preaching to the rest of the world we can only HOPE that the climate warms a few degrees rather than cool a few degrees we can only hope for a couple hundred ppm more co2 in the atmosphere to increase food production we can only hope that America ends the dominance of their foreign policy away from the neocons and that America start honouring their agreed to treaties that they never stop breaking let the markets decide, support freedom and straight forward business you can no longer look around the world and take what you think you need rules yes but as few as is needed o and maybe you should embrace your constitution and quit trying to make America more like Putin's Russia when you talked about energy quite interesting
Thanks As someone in my late 20’s only voting republican from now on. Of course everyone wants a clean planet but we need to be real. We need to Utilize the energy we have here and transition only when we have the Capacity here in the US and not help China. One of my favorite appearances on the show- Kyle Bass Consider myself a China Hawk too , we shouldn’t help a government like that.
Excellent talk apart from the snide remark regarding ngos/teenagers re: climate change. Clearly there are far more people who care about the impact of fossil fuels on the planet. And never forget that less than 100 companies contribute more than 70% of global emissions with BP and Exxon amount the worst offenders.
🚀 Coming VERY soon... Real Vision is launching a groundbreaking new learning experience for everyone who wants to be a better investor. Join the waitlist to get first access, discounts, and updates - plus get immediate free access to a special 5-part email series from Raoul Pal, taking you behind the curtain on how he invests 👉 rvtv.io/3IJtmOl
ESG is a acam.
The E goals would have more credibility if they hadn't included S&G
A great presentation. One favor, if I might, please stop using the word noble as the reason for this projected transition by 2030. In its most favorable light, the people responsible for this non-doable and economy killing timetable are misguided and profoundly naive. Most lifetime politicians are most likely incapable of appreciating the seriousness of the topics that you just presented.
Thanks for watching!
I totally agree. Ignorance, gullibility and wishful thinking do not make one "noble." We do face a grave crisis, but it is from energy depletion, not the carbon dioxide boogeyman. I am astounded that even education and wealth do not prevent people from being herded like cattle into what ever politically motivated pseudo - scientific fad that politically influential strategists want to promote, and that the commoners cannot see through the stupidity of the upper classes but are convinced they must be profoundly intelligent individuals who know exactly what they are doing. Our world is populated by idiots and fools, which may be fine for a society of serfs and lords as we were a few hundred years ago, but today it is leading us to disaster.
"Really smart money is not putting $$$ into Energy Transition" Thanks so much Wil and Kyle for a real banger ! Both of you are very humble despite your expertise.
Thanks for watching!
Sri Lanka had a ESG score of 98%
amazing you guys didn't emphasize the true problem point. EROEI (energy returned on energy invested). Shale and tar sands and fracking and deep deep sea drilling require miles of steel and oceans of diesel returning only as little as 3:1 returned energy,for energy expended to extract.....this, compared to the old straight well drilling returning 50:1 IS A HUGE CHANGE on new petroleum sources
Also, compressing and shipping LNG uses up over 25% of the BTU value of the energy in the gas. Coal to liquid fuels may soften the crash a bit, but the world's energy supply will implode, and with it the productivity of the economy, productivity of agriculture, and worst of all, the waste of war as we battle over remaining reserves. Third world famine, refugee crisis, war and revolution will exacerbate this predicament.....going to be an interesting century
I'm glad somebody sees the big picture. The big question should be how does mankind power down with as little grief as possible, because we are not going to drill our way out of this (although we should not stop drilling), nor are we going to plug the gap with renewables and nuclear (although that does not mean they may not be useful). We should slow the decline as much as possible, but the idea that we are going to prevent it and thus maintain the current or similar level of civilizational scale and complexity is a delusion.
One place we should make a huge investment is in conservation, because slowing down depletion should be a huge priority. Another should be in looking for ways to incentivize decentralization. Decentralization will happen eventually, so better it be as orderly as possible. And continuing to expand our population through immigration? That is just insanity. We should freeze our borders until we get to the other side of this transition, not to high energy renewables which is not going to happen, but back to a much lower energy world with a lot more poverty. It will happen, it is just a question of how disorderly and dangerous the transition will be, and whether we will transition to an egalitarian republic with widely distributed capital, or a highly stratified social order characterized by highly concentrated capital ownership.
Educational and extremely interesting. I watched it twice back to back.
Thanks for watching!
Seriously, when I see a Kyle Bass segment, I stop what I’m doing immediately and tune in. Fantastic interview.
Thanks for watching!
Watched this three times already, so much excellent insight to digest. Kyle always has the best guests. Thank you !
Thanks for watching!
"We need bigger government bureacracy to solve these energy problems, problems that were created by giving so much power to NGO-controlled government bureaucrats!"
*shakes head*
The problem is theres no overall strategy, a business alone cannot do that....we need govt involvement to bring energy security to the forefront
Great interview. I do think that Americans aren't objective. If China is subsidising the solar sector so the prices are cheaper, why can't the US do something similar ? Between Iraq & Afghanistan, the US spent $6t. It's more about priorities. Rather than trying to divide the world into democracies and autocracies, the US is trading with the Saudis who are the greatest autocrats. Let's have a level playing field.
Yes, we spent a lot of money in Iraq and Afghanistan - more than we could afford! That was a huge waste of real resources, and the added debt is something we are paying for in terms of diminished real economic growth and foregone domestic consumption. Subsidizing solar would also make us poorer. Subsidies don't make anything cheaper, they just disguise the costs by moving them elsewhere. Consequently, society misallocates resources because it lacks true price signals. If energy prices are high, then society needs to invest in conservation, not subsidies. Subsidies are a form of lying.
I have absolutely no qualms about trading with autocracies unless they pose a credible threat to our own security, as Communist China does, but not smaller countries. Russia is not only not a threat to the US, it is not even an autocracy. It is sort of like the countries in Latin America, in both cases cronyistic democracies with a lot of corruption (which is NOT the same thing as autocracy) and also a similar GDP per capita. But more important, its values and way of life are fundamentally compatible with our on in a way that Communism is not. China also has a similar GDP per capita, but a huge population, and it is a true autocracy built on political and moral values that are utterly incompatible with those of the West. Disturbingly, some Western leaders (Justin Trudeau is one example, by his own public admission) view Communist China as a model to aspire to. I think they would reconsider if we could bring about the downfall of that totalitarian model. Russia though is a real democracy but badly implemented, which is usually the case in poorer countries. Recently there are disturbing signs that the current government of the US wants to go down the totalitarian path. Let us pray a course correction is still possible.
*ESG is the Mark of The Beast*
@Digital Cash Cow For the same reason that cryto currecies are doomed. They are wishfull thinking backed up by lots of hype. The plans have no real value. They are grand in their world outlook, but practically they are completely useless. Green energy just does not work for most of the worlds population. I am all for it, but it is not technically developed enough yet to be a world solution. To go anti conventional power sources now is more a zealot thing than practical. The same goes for cypto it is full of zealots. It is simply not energy efficient now. Zealots think that we must stop current energy and money and go all in on new technology which is simply not mature, packed full of fraud and dishonest claims.
it's hard to get people who want to go green just how much energy goes into it. in a way you are pre paying your fuel. it's a much higher upfront cost than close to free fuel with usually minimal running costs.
i think we have to really start to force the people that want to shut down fossil fuel extraction to really provide detailed plans on how they want to replace 10 million barrels of oil per day. get them to pick the location where the solar plant will be built, the routing of the high power lines etc. We need to make them understand how little they know about the energy system, how hard and costly the transition will be, and how the western world's obsession with not building anything is hampering the transition to renewable energy.
we need mines for all the minerals required to make green tech, we need to rebuild our electrical infrastructure to move towards electrification of transport and replacing gas for heating and cooking etc.
i don't see the Grettas of the world willing to engage in a rational discussion.
The beauty of Marxist critical theory is you don't need to put forth your own plan. Just focus on and dramatize the negative aspect of whatever you wish to attack. Everything has pros and cons. If you just jawbone the public with cons, of course that public turns against it.
We don't have a way to replace 10 million barrels of oil per day (I think it is higher than that - I have read here and there that the US produces about 12 million a day and uses about 20 million), but whatever the number, we can replace very little of it with electricity for various reasons.
I wouldn’t have minded a 3 hour interview
If there are people in this world you should pay attention to what they are saying; these two guys are are worth it. I wish our world / US politicians were as curious, smart, wise, prudent as these two dudes.
If Americans stopped driving round in 5 litre engine cars you could save a huge amount of oil.
The standard in most other countries is 1-2 litre engines.
It’s clear at this stage the US only produces ridiculously large engines to protect its own industries.
The speed limit is only 60 mph for goodness sake. I can comfortably drive at that speed in a 1 litre car let alone a 5.6 hemi bigger than a house.
Wake up people
Much worse now!!! going off Exxon numbers we don't see MASSIVE increasing in O&G investment say zero by 2030 global production will drop to 30Mmbbls per day
Two points:
I find it curious that as earth’s magnetic shield is weakening by the decades, TPTB are doing everything they can to get us all more (not less) dependent upon the electric grid... 🤔
Also, while various energy sectors bicker about fracking, turbines , solar, etc.. there are confirmed Black Ops UAPs zig-zagging around the planet, defying gravity while diving in and out of the oceans. What energy are THEY using?
powdered unicorn dust. lol
@@atrothe Ostrich with head in sand. Denying Black Ops tech and earth’s weakening magnetic shield won’t make them “pretend” no matter how hard you try.
They are prioritizing efficiency over robustness. This will end traumatically if we don't find a reverse gear. But as far as advanced aerial technology, I don't doubt that it exists, but I don't think it "defies gravity," and those stories about diving in and out of oceans don't convince me at all. You need more skepticism. There is both a lot of hoaxing in the UFO/UAP community and a lot of gullibility. And I do mean a lot. Frankly, you should believe every story you hear or see about it is either a lie or a misunderstanding until proven otherwise. That way you will be right between 99% and 100% of the time.
Thats probably true that it will take many decades to get off fossil fuels, and that with current tech maybe 40% of energy comes from renewables in 2050.
Thing is every time I hear oil and gas people say that....thats with todays technologies. Obv we need some tech breakthroughs that can speed things up. We also need to consider nuclear as part of renewables.
While the big picture is complicated and will be challenging to say the least, you can take your own personal energy needs into your own hands fairly easily. While its not for everyone, with a few skills and about $15,000, you can build your own battery backed solar power system to power your home and an electric car. You can create your own individual energy independence and be free of any price hikes and shortages that may come along. Very knowledgeable and interesting talk. Now I am even more happy about getting off the grid when I did. Thanks!
Thanks for watching!
I appreciate your intentions, but 98% of people are incapable of doing that.
Moreover, that $15k will only last 5-10 years max before having to reinvest the same amount. After all, it would be built with cheaply made Chinese imported junk.
Its hard to see any positive return on such an inve for the few even capable of making it.
@@movinon1242, I agree that most people can't afford this but there are still millions that can and those that can are those that use the most power. I don't know where people get the idea that solar only last 5-10 years? That's just not true. You can expect your solar panels to last 25 years and beyond. They lose about 0.5 to 1.0% per year of operation. LiFEPO4 batteries currently last 18-25 years and they are getting better all the time. For me its hard not to see the return. Your gaining energy independence! You won't have to worry about oil shortages, price hikes or loosing power due to outages. Self sufficiency is peace of mind. A system like this pays for itself pretty quick and then your running on free power for another 20 years.
@ 49:00 micro nuclear reactors placed in mass will eliminate need for adding transmission line capacity.
Quite a service. Thank you.
Thanks for watching!
Energy...Food...Water.
Pragmatic. Objective. Exceptional. Recommended.
Big investors should spend more in the development of nuclear fusion. Sad it's not being stimulated more.
What a great conversation. Thanks so much gents. As an oil/gas investor this information is invaluable.
Thanks for watching!
5.3 million American homes heated with fuel oil
Wow...best content at free tier in months
What about solar cycle what clean energy does and kind clean?
Excellent ! Fantastic Conversation !
Odd they both say they are against government involvement in our private lives yet also say government should use national security as excuse to build transmission lines...
Transmission lines to those places where there are lots of wind, BUT never stop to ask whether wind turbines can actually satisfy our energy needs (answer: no, they can't, for a number of reasons).
Amazing content in this interview!
Fantastic video! Thanks!!
Thanks for watching!
The graph showing tremendous increase of metals use is showing GREEN TECH's increase of use. Globally, copper mining will need to increase from 21M tons (2020) to likely about 26M tons. Nickel from a global 2.7M tons (2021) to likely about 4.7Mtons. Graphite from a global 1M tons to likely about 3.6M tons.
The chart could be mated with a chart showing what increase is required for "all uses" global production.
I love the way Wil says "Globally"
Kyle you faked me out. I was ready to critique the lack of discussion on nuclear power, and Wil did that. One of your best because I kept taking notes for the future. Nothing like two smart Texans - kidding; we know there's never two smart Texans in the same room. From an old Texan, thanks.
I thought you were pro America until you said to repeal the Jones Act and then you lost my ear. So, basically, you want government support for all the businesses you have a commercial interest in and you want to outsource those industries that are your input costs, like bulkers, tankers and carriers. You don't want to help America, you just want to help yourself. FO!
I wanna hear his views on Bitcoin
maybe America should clean up their own act before preaching to the rest of the world
we can only HOPE that the climate warms a few degrees rather than cool a few degrees
we can only hope for a couple hundred ppm more co2 in the atmosphere to increase food production
we can only hope that America ends the dominance of their foreign policy away from the neocons
and that America start honouring their agreed to treaties that they never stop breaking
let the markets decide, support freedom and straight forward business
you can no longer look around the world and take what you think you need
rules yes but as few as is needed
o and maybe you should embrace your constitution and quit trying to make America more like Putin's Russia
when you talked about energy quite interesting
Thanks
As someone in my late 20’s only voting republican from now on.
Of course everyone wants a clean planet but we need to be real. We need to Utilize the energy we have here and transition only when we have the Capacity here in the US and not help China.
One of my favorite appearances on the show- Kyle Bass
Consider myself a China Hawk too , we shouldn’t help a government like that.
Random question: "Kyle wot do think of WEF?"
Gotta say, Americans really trust their media....🤣
I think there is something everyone is missing right now that no one can see.
My doubt is that Jen Granholm has even heard any discussion as prescient as this one in her entire career.
Thankyou guys
Thanks for watching!
Very interesting. Thank you.
Repeal Jones Act
Energy is the new tech
Agrivoltaics
Kyle “i.e.” Bass is the man
Meh.
Excellent talk apart from the snide remark regarding ngos/teenagers re: climate change. Clearly there are far more people who care about the impact of fossil fuels on the planet.
And never forget that less than 100 companies contribute more than 70% of global emissions with BP and Exxon amount the worst offenders.
p͓̽r͓̽o͓̽m͓̽o͓̽s͓̽m͓̽