Podcast appearances and mentions of bill loveless

In the growing conflict between Israel and Iran, many questions now loom, including the extent of US involvement, the potential for regime change, and the status of Iran's nuclear program. All this uncertainty and speculation is having some impact on energy markets and potentially much more in the weeks to come.  While there have been some attacks on energy infrastructure, there has not been a significant disruption in oil or gas supply to the global market. Some energy traders are seemingly anticipating that the conflict will remain contained in the months to come, but this is far from certain.  How is the conflict evolving? What are the paths for a ceasefire or diplomatic resolution to end the conflict? How is all of this impacting energy markets? In response to the events on June 12, we pulled in Daniel Sternoff and Richard Nephew, two leading experts at the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University SIPA to discuss what we know about Israel's attack on Iran, the backdrop of a volatile energy market, and what could happen in the coming days and weeks. Daniel is non-resident fellow at CGEP. He is also the Head of Energy Aspects' Executive Briefing Service.  Richard is a senior research scholar at CGEP. He formerly served as the US Deputy Special Envoy for Iran under the Biden administration where he played a key role in negotiations over the Iran deal. Daniel and Richard joined Jason Bordoff on the afternoon of June 18 to unpack the escalating conflict in the region. They discussed the current state of Iran's nuclear program, the scenarios for conflict escalating in the Middle East and how oil prices fit into and might be affected by all of this.   Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Gregory Vilfranc of Franc Village Studios engineered this show.

Climate imperatives, national security, and the need for reliable, carbon-free, dispatchable power to meet rising electricity demand are all contributing to a resurgence in nuclear energy. The United States is taking a leading role in this industry's growth. Tech companies are signing major deals for nuclear energy to meet their growing energy needs. And President Trump recently signed four executive orders aimed at dramatically increasing nuclear power generation — an issue with rare bipartisan support. But significant challenges remain. Cost overruns and delays, as seen with the troubled Vogtle project in Georgia, are hampering power plant construction in the US. Meanwhile, China and Russia are dominating global nuclear construction and fuel, raising questions about American competitiveness and national security. So can the United States become a leader in nuclear energy deployment, without sacrificing safety? What role will new technologies and policy play in changing the trajectory? And what part should the US government play in financing, regulating, and promoting nuclear energy both domestically and internationally? This week, Jason Bordoff speaks with Ashley Finan and Matt Bowen about the drivers behind this nuclear resurgence and why, as they argue in a recent Foreign Policy article, it is vital to meet rising electricity demand.  Ashley recently joined the Center on Global Energy Policy as a global fellow after serving in senior leadership roles at Idaho National Laboratory, where she worked on nuclear energy and national security issues. Matt is a senior research scholar at the Center on Global Energy Policy, where he focuses on nuclear energy policy, economics, and regulation. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.  

On June 12th, Israel carried out overnight airstrikes targeting Iranian nuclear facilities, military infrastructure, military leaders, and nuclear scientists. While the full scope and implications of the attack are still emerging, energy markets responded immediately. Oil prices spiked in the aftermath, although they subsequently eased.  What are the regional implications of this conflict? How might Iran retaliate and how might the US respond? How will this impact ongoing negotiations between the US and Iran over Iran's nuclear program? And what are the possible impacts on energy markets? For this special episode, we pulled in two leading experts from the Center on Global Energy Policy to discuss what we know so far about Israel's attack on Iran and what could happen in the coming days and weeks. Richard Nephew is a senior research scholar at the Center on Global Energy Policy. He formerly served as the US Deputy Special Envoy for Iran under the Biden administration where he played a key role in negotiations over the Iran nuclear deal. Karen Young is a senior research scholar at the Center on Global Energy Policy and a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, where she focuses on the political economy of the Gulf states and energy policy. Karen and Richard joined host Jason Bordoff to unpack the escalating conflict in the region. They discussed the current state of Iran's nuclear program, the potential consequences of the unfolding crisis, and what key developments to watch for. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Gregory Vilfranc of Franc Village Studios engineered today's show.  

Congress is rushing to enact what could be the most significant energy policy reversal in decades. The US Senate has begun work on an enormous budget reconciliation bill that would extend President Trump's tax cuts while all but eliminating clean energy programs to help pay for them. The House version substantially repeals nearly all tax credits from the Inflation Reduction Act—affecting everything from solar and wind development to hydrogen and carbon capture projects. According to the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School/Columbia Climate School, approximately $9.65 billion in unobligated IRA funds  are at risk of rescission. Critics of the cuts say this could kill progress toward decarbonization, and pull the plug on US clean energy manufacturing. But supporters argue it's necessary fiscal discipline. So what's really happening in the Senate? Can moderate Republicans preserve some clean energy provisions? And with a Fourth of July deadline looming, what wildcard events could change the political calculus? This week, Bill Loveless speaks with energy analyst Kevin Book about the massive budget reconciliation bill currently moving through Congress and what it could mean for US energy policy. Kevin is managing director of research at ClearView Energy Partners. He has tracked congressional energy legislation and its real-world impacts for years. In addition to leading ClearView's research team, he is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the National Petroleum Council, an advisory body to the Secretary of Energy. He's also a non-resident senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.  

In today's polarized political landscape, energy policy has become increasingly partisan. States rich in both fossil fuels and renewable resources must confront growing electricity demand and aging infrastructure. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is pushing to defund critical energy projects under the Inflation Reduction Act while also opening new fossil energy development on public land. And congressional efforts at energy permitting reform have stalled despite broad agreement on the need to streamline approvals. So what will it take to move beyond four-year election cycles and develop an enduring energy strategy? How can lawmakers build coalitions in this divided environment? And can we craft energy policies that serve both economic and environmental goals? This week, Bill Loveless speaks with former Senator Joe Manchin about the state of US energy policy. Following his tenure as governor of West Virginia, Joe Manchin served as a US Senator from 2010 to 2024. As chairman of the Senate Energy Committee, he played a pivotal role in shaping major energy legislation, including the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act and the Inflation Reduction Act. Today, he serves on the Bipartisan Policy Center's Energy Council and is writing a memoir, titled Dead Center, which is set to be released in September. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.  

President Trump's recent visit to the Gulf region marked a dramatic shift from the previous administration's Middle East diplomacy. In his visit to Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar, Trump focused on securing significant investment commitments and commercial partnerships to support the region's AI and other ambitions.  The trip showcased Trump's transactional approach to foreign policy—one focused on bilateral deals rather than regional frameworks, and economic partnerships over military interventions. It also raised important questions about oil markets, geopolitical competition with China, nuclear agreements, and the future of energy prices. So what are the likely impacts of massive investment pledges from Gulf nations? Do low oil prices limit the ability to make good on them? What is the outlook for oil prices with uncertainty over OPEC+ policy, a possible Iran deal, and possible new sanctions on Russia? And what does Trump's transactional diplomacy mean for traditional alliances and regional stability?  This week, Jason Bordoff speaks with Helima Croft, Joe McMonigle, and Karen Young about how the Trump administration is reshaping U.S. relations with Middle East countries and the long- and short-term implications it will have on energy markets and geopolitics. Helima is managing director and global head of commodity strategy at RBC Capital Markets, where she leads the coverage of energy markets and geopolitical risk. Joe is a distinguished visiting fellow here at the Center on Global Energy Policy and the founder and president of the Global Center for Energy Analysis, an independent research and analysis firm. Karen is a senior research scholar here at the Center on Global Energy Policy and a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute where she focuses on the political economy of the Gulf States and energy policy. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.  

We often associate energy poverty with developing nations, but the reality is that tens of millions of Americans struggle to pay their monthly energy bills. Oftentimes, they forgo heating or cooling their homes in order to pay rent or buy food. And ultimately, they risk losing access to energy altogether, through utility shutoffs. For families living in inadequate housing with poor insulation and inefficient appliances, energy insecurity impacts health, comfort, and quality of life. For some, government assistance programs are a lifeline. Yet, despite rising energy rates, the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) is in danger of losing funding.  So what policy solutions could address the systemic causes of energy insecurity? How can government assistance be reframed to better support and empower energy insecure households? And will the transition to clean energy alleviate or worsen energy insecurity? This week, Jason Bordoff speaks with Diana Hernández about her recent book that seeks to answer those questions and proposes a framework for energy equity. Diana is an associate professor at Columbia University and co-directs the Energy Opportunity Lab at the Center on Global Energy Policy. Her book, "Powerless: The People's Struggle for Energy," which she co-authored with Jennifer Laird, an assistant professor at Lehman College, was released in April. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.  

For years, Japan set aggressive decarbonization targets, positioning itself as a climate leader despite limited domestic resources. But recent geopolitical earthquakes like the ongoing war in Ukraine, increasing energy demand, and a near-blackout in Tokyo have forced Japan to reassess its priorities. Japan's new strategic energy plan, approved by the nation's government in February, represents this shifting calculus. While maintaining long-term carbon neutrality goals, it elevates energy security concerns. And it introduces a "Plan B" that acknowledges technological deployment might not match ambitious timelines. So how can a resource-poor nation like Japan pursue both climate goals and energy security? What role will energy sources like LNG and nuclear power play in this new strategy? And as nations everywhere face similar pressures, does Japan's approach offer a model for pragmatic energy planning in an increasingly unstable world? This week, Bill Loveless speaks with Tatsuya Terazawa about Japan's new strategic energy plan.  Tatsuya Terazawa is the chairman and CEO of Japan's Institute of Energy Economics, a think tank that provides analyses and policy recommendations based on Japan's goals of carbon neutrality and energy security. Before joining the Institute, he served as the senior advisor of Japan's cabinet office and held a number of roles at Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.  

From oil pipelines crossing the border to integrated electricity grids, energy trade has long been a key part of the economic relationship between the United States and Canada. Now, President Trump's trade policies are upending longstanding cooperative norms on both sides of the border. Last week's snap election has brought a significant change in Canada's leadership. Former central banker Mark Carney edged past Conservative Pierre Poilievre — a surprising win for the Liberal Party. This narrow margin of victory reflects a deeply divided electorate grappling with issues of economic security, climate policy, and Canada's place in a changing world. Carney has boldly declared the traditional U.S.-Canada relationship "over" and his victory signaled support for a more independent path. So can Carney balance both clean and conventional energy development amid provincial tensions, particularly with oil-rich Alberta? How will Canada respond to Trump's proposed tariffs when nearly all of its crude oil exports flow to the United States? And will Carney use his experience as a champion of climate finance to help Canada achieve its goal of net-zero emissions by 2050?  This week, Bill Loveless speaks with Andrew Leach about the climate and energy policy battles Carney faces within Canada, a place Carney is eager to turn into an energy superpower. Andrew Leach is an energy and environmental economist. He is a professor at the University of Alberta, with a joint appointment in the department of economics and the faculty of law. His research spans energy and economics, but he is particularly interested in climate change policies and law. His 2023 book, “Between Doom & Denial: Facing Facts about Climate Change,” explores the challenges Canadians face as they confront climate change. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.  

After more than three years of intense fighting following Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the path to end the war has been challenging. President Trump has been aggressively pushing both Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Russian President Vladimir Putin toward a peace deal as part of Trump's campaign promise to quickly end the war. Meanwhile, energy has emerged as a critical factor, functioning both as a weapon and target in this war. The peace deal Trump envisions would reportedly include U.S. control of the Ukrainian electrical supply and its nuclear power plants. And separately, the Trump administration has been working on a mineral deal with Ukraine for months. But developing any of those resources would take time because Ukraine's energy infrastructure has been severely crippled by war. In parts of Ukraine blackouts have become the norm. So what are the potential paths for peace ahead for Ukraine and how might sharing its mineral or energy resources with the U.S. play into those options? How has Ukraine's energy infrastructure fared during the war? And what energy security lessons can other countries learn from this conflict? This week, Jason Bordoff talks with Kyiv-based climate and energy reporter Tim McDonnell about the role that energy has played in the war in Ukraine and how it could factor into its resolution. Tim is the climate and energy editor for Semafor, where he writes the Net Zero newsletter, and is also a reporter for Quartz. He has covered the business and science of climate change for more than 10 years and has written for The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Economist, among other publications. Tim lives in and reports from Kyiv and is writing a book about the role of energy in the Ukraine conflict. He joined the podcast to talk about the role energy plays in this conflict. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.  

As President Biden's national security advisor, Jake Sullivan laid out a strategy for what he called a “foreign policy for the middle class.” Using the metaphor of a small yard and a high fence, the Biden administration's approach focused on reshoring critical industries and manufacturing, supporting innovation, and protecting strategic technologies.  The strategy relied on industrial policy, tariffs and sanctions — some of the same economic tools the Trump administration is now using to launch a global trade war. The broad shift on both sides of the aisle to focused on national security, economic security, and supply chain resilience has enormous implications for the clean energy transition, from critical minerals and solar panels to batteries and EVs.  So how should we think about the relationship between economic resilience, energy security, and climate action? What lessons can we draw from the Biden administration's approach to countering China? And looking ahead, what should the U.S. prioritize when it comes to energy security? This week's episode features a fireside chat between Jason Bordoff and Jake Sullivan from the Columbia Global Energy Summit 2025, which was hosted by the Center on Global Energy Policy, at Columbia University SIPA earlier this month. Jake Sullivan recently became the Kissinger professor of the practice of statecraft and world order at the Harvard Kennedy School. He served as President Biden's national security advisor from 2021 to 2025. In the Obama administration, he was then Vice President Biden's national security advisor and deputy chief of staff to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.  

It's hard to overstate how consequential President Trump's “Liberation Day” tariffs have been for American economic policy. While the administration has paused the steep reciprocal tariffs it announced on trading partners other than China, a flat across-the-board 10% tariff remains. And China has raised tariffs on all U.S. goods to over 100% in retaliation.  Some economists fear this trade war could have a seismic impact across the American economy, including on clean energy. The exceptionally high tariffs on China in particular could have a significant bearing on clean tech products — things like batteries, solar panels, and wind turbines. So what are the possible outcomes? Do our trade deficits or national security imperatives necessitate this trade war? What would a turn away from globalization mean for efforts to confront climate change? And what does all of this mean for the future of industrial policy in the U.S.? This week, Jason Bordoff talks with Jason Furman about the flurry of Trump administration tariffs and how they could play out for the energy industry. Jason Furman is Aetna professor of the practice of economic policy at Harvard University. Prior to his appointment at Harvard, he served as a key economic advisor to President Obama, including as the chair of the Council of Economic Advisors. Jason played a key role in implementing the major economic policy initiatives of the Obama administration, including the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and the Affordable Care Act.  Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Additional support from Trevor Sutton. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.

In energy policy circles, the word “resilience” often refers to future-proof systems or infrastructure designed for the transition away from fossil fuels. But resilience means something different to the communities that have been built on those conventional energy sources.  Without a policy strategy, communities whose economies are dependent on fossil fuels aren't well positioned to thrive in – or perhaps even survive – a clean energy transition.  So how can economic resilience improve livelihoods in fossil fuel dependent communities? Are the near-term risks and economic impacts these communities face underappreciated? And what does this all mean in today's political environment?  This week host Bill Loveless talks to Emily Grubert and Noah Kaufman, two scholars at the Resilient Energy Economies initiative, a collaboration between the Bezos Earth Fund, Resources for the Future, and the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University SIPA. Emily is a civil engineer and environmental sociologist. She is an associate professor of sustainable energy policy in the Keough School of Global Affairs at the University of Notre Dame. She also worked in the Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management at the Department of Energy under the Biden administration. Noah is an economist who has worked on energy and climate change policy. He is a research scholar at the Center on Global Energy Policy. He also served as a senior economist at the Council of Economic Advisers under President Biden and as the deputy associate director of energy and climate change at the White House Council on Environmental Quality under President Obama. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Erin Hardick, Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.

The European Union's energy landscape is transforming rapidly, as the bloc works to reduce emissions, lower energy prices, and decrease dependence on Russian fuel—three goals proving to be a challenge.  Though renewables now generate nearly half of Europe's electricity, significant challenges remain. Lengthy permitting processes are stalling the deployment of new clean generation and infrastructure and the continent requires improvements in energy system interconnections between countries. And questions remain about the role of certain forms of energy, like nuclear power and hydrogen, in Europe's future energy mix. So how is Europe addressing these competing priorities? And what do certain trade-offs mean for energy affordability, security, and economic competitiveness?  This week host Jason Bordoff talks with Dan Jørgensen, the new European commissioner for energy and housing.  Commissioner Jørgensen previously served as Danish minister for development cooperation and minister for global climate policy. He is a member of the Social Democratic Party of Denmark and was a member of the Danish parliament from 2015 to 2024.  Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Erin Hardick, Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.  

Across America, energy policy is often driven by short-term politics over long-term planning. Despite record-breaking U.S. oil production in recent years, partisan battles continue over fossil fuels and climate action. States like North Dakota illustrate this tension perfectly. Rich in both oil and wind resources, they navigate between traditional energy production and renewable development. But nationwide, critical energy infrastructure faces roadblocks—from pipelines stalled by local opposition to transmission lines needed for clean energy expansion. So what will it take to develop a nonpartisan national energy strategy? How do we balance immediate economic needs with climate goals? And as electricity demands grow while the power grid faces new challenges, what will it take to develop an energy strategy beyond the politics of four-year election cycles? This week host Bill Loveless talks with Heidi Heitkamp about crafting enduring energy policies that serve both economic and environmental goals. Heidi served as a U.S. senator from North Dakota from 2013 to 2019, becoming the first woman elected to represent the state in that chamber. Before her time in the Senate, Heitkamp served as North Dakota's attorney general and state tax commissioner. Today, she is director of the University of Chicago Institute of Politics and works with the university's Institute for Climate and Sustainable Growth.  Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Erin Hardick, Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.  

Last week, energy industry leaders gathered in Houston for CERAWeek by S&P Global, one of the most important annual industry events focusing on the current state of energy markets, policy, and technology. This year's conference took place against a backdrop of shifting global energy dynamics — declining oil prices, the Trump administration's "drill baby drill" agenda, growing concerns about energy security, geopolitical tensions, and ongoing debates about the pace and direction of the energy transition. So what were the week's key takeaways? How are energy leaders reacting to a second Trump administration? And what does the future of global energy markets look like? This week host Jason Bordoff talks with two energy reporters — Bloomberg's Javier Blas and Axios's Ben Geman — about their takeaways from CERAWeek and what they heard on and off stage. Javier is an opinion columnist for Bloomberg, covering energy and commodities. He was previously at the Financial Times where he held various positions including roles as the Africa editor and the commodities editor. Ben is an energy and climate reporter at Axios. He is the co-author of the daily Axios Generate newsletter and covers the world of energy business and policy. He previously covered these topics for National Journal, The Hill, and E&E News. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Erin Hardick, Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.

Energy and climate change are becoming ever more central to America's national security. It used to be that foreign policy and national security discussions related to energy focused primarily on oil prices and Middle East relations. Now, these conversations also include topics like critical mineral supply chains, clean energy competition with China, climate instability, and more. The Biden administration navigated this increasingly complex terrain for four years. It confronted Russia's weaponization of energy following its invasion of Ukraine; managed climate negotiations with difficult diplomatic relationships; and reshaped America's approach to energy security in a warming world. So how should we think about the intersection of energy, climate, and national security going forward? And what lessons can we draw from the Biden administration's experience? This week host Jason Bordoff talks with Jon Finer about the intersection of energy, climate change, and national security. Jon is a distinguished visiting fellow at the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University SIPA. He recently served as deputy national security advisor in the Biden administration, where he was a key architect of the administration's foreign policy. Prior to that role, Jon served in the Obama administration for seven and a half years in various positions, including chief of staff to Secretary of State John Kerry. Jon began his career in journalism, first covering Major League Baseball before moving to the security beat, covering conflicts in Iraq and other regions for the Washington Post. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Erin Hardick, Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Additional support from Caroline Pitman, Jon Elkind, Kevin Brennan, Luisa Palacios and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.

The Biden administration took office with ambitious plans to accelerate America's clean energy transition. Over four years, it enacted major climate legislation, poured billions into new clean energy manufacturing, built partnerships with global allies on clean energy, and navigated a global energy crisis after Russia's invasion of Ukraine. With President Trump's return to office, what happens now?  The clean energy transition is proving to be more complex than some expected, with challenges around affordability, security, and balancing climate goals with other economic priorities. In this increasingly challenging geopolitical landscape, how should we think about America's energy policy going forward? And how should we think about the legacy of the Biden administration's energy agenda?  This week host Jason Bordoff talks with David Turk about the Biden administration's energy policy legacy and the challenges of balancing affordability, security, and climate goals.  David is a distinguished visiting fellow at the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University SIPA. He recently completed his service as deputy secretary of energy in the Biden administration, where he was the number-two official and chief operating officer at the Department of Energy. Prior to this role, David served as deputy executive director of the International Energy Agency. During the Obama administration, he worked at the Department of Energy, where he led the launch of Mission Innovation – a global effort to accelerate clean energy innovation. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Erin Hardick, Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.

The race to power artificial intelligence is dramatically reshaping America's electricity landscape.  Recent analysis from the power-consultancy firm Grid Strategies shows that between 2024 and 2029, U.S. electricity demand will grow at five times the rate predicted in 2022. This surge comes as artificial intelligence and data centers reshape power markets, with tech giants like Microsoft and Amazon pursuing direct power purchase deals, sometimes bypassing traditional utility structures entirely. At the same time, President Trump's declaration of an energy emergency and appointment of new leadership at key agencies like the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission signal potential upheaval in how we approach grid reliability, renewable energy integration, and climate goals. So how do we meet this demand growth while navigating a complex political environment? And what role will emerging technologies like advanced nuclear, enhanced geothermal, and energy storage play in our energy future? This week host Bill Loveless talks with Michelle Solomon about the challenges and opportunities facing the U.S. electricity sector. Michelle is a senior policy analyst at Energy Innovation, focusing on electricity policy. She brings a distinctive background combining technical and policy experience. Before joining Energy Innovation, she earned her Ph.D. in materials science and engineering from Stanford University. She also served as a Congressional Science and Engineering Fellow working on energy policy in the Senate. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Erin Hardick, Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.  

Europe is facing a challenging year as natural gas prices surge. While the continent seemed to weather the initial shock of losing Russian gas supplies, it's now clear many were declaring victory too soon. Storage levels are dropping this winter, and the loss of Russian pipeline gas through Ukraine has left Europe increasingly dependent on global LNG markets. Meanwhile, in the U.S., President Trump's administration has promised to "unleash American energy dominance" by lifting restrictions on new permits for LNG exports. But questions remain about domestic gas production capacity, infrastructure constraints, and the impact on U.S. prices. How are these developments reshaping global gas markets, and what do they mean for Europe's industrial competitiveness? How might geopolitical tensions affect the future of global gas trade? And what does all of this mean for reducing greenhouse gas emissions? This week on the show, Jason Bordoff talks with gas market experts Anne-Sophie Corbeau and Ira Joseph about the outlook for LNG and its geopolitical and environmental implications. Anne-Sophie is a global research scholar at the Center on Global Energy Policy, where she focuses on hydrogen and natural gas. Her career in the energy industry spans over 20 years, including stints as the head of gas analysis at BP, senior gas analyst at the International Energy Agency, and research fellow at the King Abdullah Petroleum Studies and Research Center.  Ira is a senior research associate at the Center on Global Energy Policy. Previously, he headed global generating fuels and electric power pricing at S&P Global Platts. Before that, he was the global head of gas and power analytics at Platts. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Erin Hardick, Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.

 At the start of February, President Trump launched a trade war. The president announced sweeping tariffs on goods imported from China, Canada, and Mexico. Although he temporarily backed away from the highest penalties, Trump clearly indicated that tariffs will be central to his policy agenda. This follows the Biden administration's embrace of steep tariffs on electric vehicle imports from China, and sanctions against Russia aimed at stifling its energy sector.  These economic chokepoints are part of a broader shift of the global economy. Countries are weaponizing economic power through sanctions, tariffs, and export controls — reflecting a shift away from decades of global economic integration. So how did we get here? What does this new age of economic warfare mean for global stability and the global economy? And how might these tools reshape everything from energy markets to global banking systems in the years ahead? This week, Jason Bordoff talks to Eddie Fishman about his upcoming book "Chokepoints: American Power in the Age of Economic Warfare," which comes out on February 25th. The book traces the evolution of economic warfare from the “War on Terror” to today's great power competition. Eddie is a senior research scholar at the Center on Global Energy Policy and an adjunct professor at Columbia University. He also serves as an adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security and a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council. Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Erin Hardick, Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.

Over the past month, the Trump administration has declared a national energy emergency, launched an ambitious agenda aimed at transforming the nation's energy landscape, and pulled back from America's climate commitments. At the heart of Trump's “Unleashing American Energy” strategy lies a complex balancing act: maximizing domestic energy production and infrastructure development while also navigating concerns about the cost of energy, grid reliability, and economic competitiveness. And there are open questions about the implications for the Biden administration's energy and climate initiatives, including the Inflation Reduction Act, and more broadly for America's energy transition.  How will this reshaping of American energy policy affect domestic markets? What role will technological innovation play in bridging competing priorities? And how might this transformation impact the delicate balance between energy security and climate considerations? This week host Jason Bordoff talks with Paul Dabbar about the Trump administration's energy agenda, and its focus on national security and energy affordability. Paul is the chairman and CEO of Bohr Quantum Technologies and a non-resident fellow at Columbia's Center on Global Energy Policy. He has spent the last few months leading the efforts of the incoming Trump administration to put together the U.S. Department of Energy. Paul served as the fourth undersecretary of energy for science during the first Trump administration.  Credits: Hosted by Jason Bordoff and Bill Loveless. Produced by Erin Hardick, Mary Catherine O'Connor, Caroline Pitman, and Kyu Lee. Engineering by Sean Marquand. Stephen Lacey is executive producer.

Last week, President Trump wasted no time in making good on a long list of energy-related campaign promises. Declaring a national energy emergency, he issued executive orders that could undo several Biden- and Obama-era climate policies. Carbon emissions standards are now in limbo, as are electric vehicle incentives and building energy efficiency standards. Trump wants to lift barriers to fossil fuel and mineral exploration and production. And once again, he has ordered the U.S. to withdraw from the Paris Agreement.   What are the likely near- and mid-term impacts of these seismic shifts in policy? How are last week's executive orders likely to play out in the courts? What changes are afoot for the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Energy, and the Department of the Interior? What role will the Treasury Department play in energy policy, given its responsibilities with tariffs, tax credits, and sanctions?  This week, Bill Loveless talks with reporters Jennifer Dlouhy and Maxine Joselow about the year ahead and the stories they're chasing. Jennifer is an energy and environmental policy reporter for Bloomberg News. Before joining Bloomberg in 2015, she was the Washington correspondent for the Houston Chronicle where she covered energy and environmental policy with a special focus on oil and gas. Maxine covers climate change and the environment for The Washington Post, focusing on US climate policy and politics. Before joining the Post in 2021, she was at E&E News, where her investigative reporting was honored with a Dateline Award from the D.C. Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists.

The year 2024 ended with a sobering milestone: it was officially the hottest year ever recorded. That pattern of extremes continues around the world, especially in Southern California, which is suffering from one of its worst disasters in history. First responders are battling lethal wildfires that have consumed more than 12,000 buildings and homes, and forced more than 100,000 people to evacuate.  But beyond these headlines about rising temperatures and intensifying disasters lies a critical question: How can we better predict and prepare for extreme weather events in a warming world? Recent breakthroughs in AI-powered weather forecasting have produced new models that not only match but sometimes outperform traditional prediction systems. These advances couldn't come at a more crucial time – in 2023 alone, the US suffered $95 billion in damages from 28 separate extreme weather events. So, how do we ensure these powerful new tools reach the communities that need them most? How can advances in weather forecasting enhance energy resiliency? And what role should public agencies play as private companies push the boundaries of prediction technology? This week host Bill Loveless talks with Alice Hill and Colin McCormick about AI in weather forecasting. Together, they authored a chapter on extreme weather response in the Innovation for Cool Earth Forum's report Artificial Intelligence for Climate Change Mitigation Roadmap.  Alice is the David M. Rubenstein senior fellow for energy and the environment at the Council on Foreign Relations. She previously served as special assistant to President Obama and senior director for resilience policy on the National Security Council. Colin is a principal scientist at Carbon Direct, where he provides expertise across carbon removal methods and industrial decarbonization. He previously served as senior advisor for R&D at the US Department of Energy. He is currently an adjunct professor at Georgetown University's Walsh School of Foreign Service.

In Brazil, the energy transition is pushed and prodded by conflicting forces.  Its government is taking significant steps to cut emissions. For example, in August, it passed a much-anticipated low-carbon hydrogen framework; and in November, a law to create a regulated carbon market. And since taking office in 2023, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has spearheaded significant reductions in deforestation of the Amazon rainforest.  But Brazil is also Latin America's biggest producer of oil, and it has been ramping up its output.  In light of Brazil's strategic role in climate – it currently holds the presidency of the G-8, and in 2025 it will host COP30 – we're rerunning an episode from February digging into Brazil's energy transition.  How is the energy transition in Brazil unfolding amid these conflicting pressures? And how can the country balance environmental protection and energy security?  Bill Loveless talks with Thiago Barral about how Brazil plans to build up clean energy technologies, and how geopolitics shapes that strategy.  Thiago is the national secretary of planning and energy transition of the Ministry of Mines and Energy for Brazil. Before his role as secretary, he was the president of the Energy Research Company, a Brazilian institution responsible for energy planning studies and official state energy statistics. Thiago joined the Energy Research Company in 2007, and also served as director of energy economics and environmental studies.

The international climate negotiation process stands at a critical juncture. At the recent COP29 summit in Azerbaijan, nations struggled to find common ground on financial support and carbon market strategies, all while grappling with the persistent influence of fossil fuel industries.  Industrialized countries did pledge $300 billion to help developing nations adapt to climate change, but scientists say the commitment is still far short of the trillion dollars needed to prevent catastrophic environmental impacts.  So, how can global leaders close the financing gap? And what practical approaches can ensure meaningful progress in climate negotiations amid rapidly changing political landscapes? This week host Bill Loveless talks with Elliot Diringer about the COP process and what the outcome of this year's summit means for the global energy transition. Elliot is a global fellow at the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University SIPA, directing the Center's International Dialogue on Climate and Trade. He served as a senior policy advisor to Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry and led the establishment of the Energy Transition Accelerator under the Biden administration. Elliot also spent more than 20 years at the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, serving as the head of the international program. He has attended 26 Conference of the Parties summits, most recently attending COP29 in Azerbaijan.

The clean energy transition has a dirty underside. To move away from fossil fuels and toward solar, wind, batteries, and other alternative sources of energy, we have to intensify mining operations for critical minerals like lithium, copper, and cobalt. According to a Global Witness analysis of S&P Global data, copper mining will increase more than 25% between 2021 and 2028. Cobalt mining will be up more than 100%. Lithium, more than 300%. And all that mining has serious environmental and social impacts, particularly in developing countries. This week, host Bill Loveless talks with Vince Beiser about his latest book “Power Metal: The Race for the Resources That Will Shape the Future.” Vince is an author and journalist whose work has appeared in Wired, Harper's Magazine, The Atlantic, and The New York Times, among other publications. They discuss cleaning up the chase for critical minerals, advancing the clean energy transition while minimizing mining impacts globally, and what role the U.S. government can play, particularly with an incoming Trump administration.

In 1953, the New York Yankees beat the Brooklyn Dodgers in the World Series, “From Here to Eternity” won the Academy Award for Best Motion Picture. And on May 24 deep in the  education section of The New York Times, there was a short piece titled “How Industry May Change Climate.” In the years after, scientists went from writing about the possible impacts of pollution on climate to warning U.S. presidents. And energy policy expert and scholar Jay Hakes says there's much more to the story. From scientists who quietly worked to address growing environmental threats, to lawmakers who deliberated in Congress and the White House over what to do about them, Jay says there's a history that hasn't been told. In his new book, Jay looks at these early climate change pioneers and asks about the challenges they faced.   What was it like trying to influence the White House? What solutions did these pioneers offer? And how can their stories further our discourse around climate change today?  This week, we go back to a conversation from August between host Bill Loveless and Jay Hakes about his book “The Presidents and the Planet: Climate Change Science and Politics from Eisenhower to Bush.”  Jay is a scholar and author on U.S. energy policy. From 2000-2013 he served as the director of the Jimmy Carter Presidential Library. He also served in both the Obama and Clinton administrations, including a seven-year stint as director of the U.S. Energy Information Administration.  Jay's other books include “Energy Crises: Nixon, Ford, Carter, and Hard Choices in the 1970s” and “A Declaration of Energy Independence.”

The artificial intelligence boom is fueling a massive uptick in energy demand globally.  A Goldman Sachs report from earlier this year claimed that processing a single ChatGPT query requires almost ten times the amount of electricity as a single Google search.  But it's not just ChatGPT queries driving up demand. As we transition to more renewable energy sources, AI is becoming critical to managing and improving efficiency across our electric grid.  So how are some of the biggest American tech companies securing the power they need to meet demand? They're going nuclear.  Tech giant Microsoft recently secured a deal to restart the last functional reactor at Three Mile Island with access to 100% of the power generated. And Amazon announced a $500 million investment to develop small modular nuclear reactors. It's a sign that large tech companies see data centers – and the AI they enable –  as critical to their futures.  This week, host Bill Loveless talks with Jason Bordoff and Jared Dunnmon about their latest co-written column for Foreign Policy, titled “America's AI Leadership Depends on Energy.” Jason is founding director of the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs. He's also a professor of professional practice in international and public affairs, the co-founding dean emeritus at the Columbia Climate School, and a former senior director on the staff of the U.S. National Security Council. Jared is a nonresident fellow at the Center on Global Energy Policy. He's also a former technical director for artificial intelligence at the U.S. Defense Department's Defense Innovation Unit.

Back in 2012, the Department of Defense issued a first-of-its-kind “Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap.” It was designed to prepare the U.S. military for increasing threats to national security in the form of rising sea levels, increasing global temperatures, and growing conflicts over basic resources like food and water. It stated that “Climate change is expected to play a significant role in the DOD's ability to fulfill its mission in the future.” Fast-forward to today, and Sherri Goodman says the DOD now sees combating climate change as central to its mission.    Sherri was appointed the first-ever deputy undersecretary of defense focusing on environmental security. One of her first assignments was cleaning up nuclear weapons development and production sites. And in 1998, she helped develop the military's first climate change plan, focused mainly on reducing emissions. This week, host Bill Loveless talks with Sherri about her latest book, “Threat Multiplier: Climate, Military Leadership, and the Fight for Global Security.” Sherri explains how far the military's approach to climate change has come over the past 25 years.  Sherri is secretary general of the International Military Council on Climate and Security and a senior fellow at the Wilson Center. She's also founder and former executive director of the Center for Naval Analyses Military Advisory Board and is board chair of the Council on Strategic Risks, which includes the Center for Climate and Security.

It's no secret that Republicans and Democrats don't see eye to eye on climate change.  According to a Pew Research Survey conducted earlier this year, just 12% of Republicans and Republican-leaners think climate change should be a top priority for the president and Congress. Meanwhile, the official 2024 Democratic party platform states there's “nothing more important than addressing the climate crisis." Energy and environmental law professor David Spence says today's news and social media are partly responsible for the divide.  In his new book, “Climate of Contempt: How to Rescue the U.S. Energy Transition from Voter Partisanship,” David argues it's all but impossible for the government to take significant action to address global warming in a media environment focused on persuading more than educating.  This week host Bill Loveless talks with David about his book and his perspective on the ideological polarization and negative partisanship that's been building in the U.S. in the past 10-15 years. And how he believes getting us all offline and engaging with each other in person can help push regulatory politics forward. David is the Rex G. Baker Chair in Natural Resources Law in the School of Law at the University of Texas at Austin. He's also a professor of business, government, and society in the McCombs School of Business at UT Austin, where he teaches courses in energy and environmental regulation. And he's co-author of a leading casebook “Energy, Economics, and the Environment.”

Thanks to the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act, the Department of Energy has been flush with cash for the past couple of years. Between the two measures, the DOE now has nearly $100 billion to put toward clean energy and grid development projects around the country through funding and loans. There's an expectation that these contributions will drive private investment—and they have been. This July, the DOE reported nearly $50 billion in funding awards already, with more than $60 billion in private investments matching federal dollars. This week, host Bill Loveless talks with David Crane about where these funds have been going and what effects they're having on clean energy applications around the country. They also discuss how the DOE is addressing nationwide energy challenges like transmission line permitting, storage, and other hurdles to decarbonization. David is the under-secretary for infrastructure at the Department of Energy. He previously served as director of DOE's Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations. He was also CEO of Climate Real Impact Solutions, as well as NRG Energy.

In 1953, the New York Yankees beat the Brooklyn Dodgers in the World Series, “From Here to Eternity” won the Academy Award for Best Motion Picture. And on May 24 deep in the  education section of The New York Times, there was a short piece titled “How Industry May Change Climate.” In the years after, scientists went from writing about the possible impacts of pollution on climate to warning U.S. presidents. And energy policy expert and scholar Jay Hakes says there's much more to the story. From scientists who quietly worked to address growing environmental threats, to lawmakers who deliberated in Congress and the White House over what to do about them, Jay says there's a history that hasn't been told. In his new book, Jay looks at these early climate change pioneers and asks about the challenges they faced.   What was it like trying to influence the White House? What solutions did these pioneers offer? And how can their stories further our discourse around climate change today?  This week, host Bill Loveless talks with Jay Hakes about his book “The Presidents and the Planet: Climate Change Science and Politics from Eisenhower to Bush.”  Jay is a scholar and author on U.S. energy policy. From 2000-2013 he served as the director of the Jimmy Carter Presidential Library. He also served in both the Obama and Clinton administrations, including a seven-year stint as director of the U.S. Energy Information Administration.  Jay's other books include “Energy Crises: Nixon, Ford, Carter, and Hard Choices in the 1970s” and “A Declaration of Energy Policy Independence.”

With her historic victory in Mexico's presidential election in June, Claudia Sheinbaum will be the country's first-ever female leader. And because of her background as a climate scientist who contributed to influential UN climate reports, many hope she will reverse Mexico's drift away from climate leadership. But it's not simple. Sheinbaum is a political protégé of outgoing president Andrés Manuel López Obrador. In his six years as president, López Obrador was a popular leader, but failed to advance climate policy. In fact, Mexico is one of just two countries out of the G20 without a net-zero target for carbon emissions. Even as López Obrador propped up the oil sector, the primary state-owned petroleum company Pemex is deep in debt and seeing four-decade lows in production. And Mexico's heavy dependence on the U.S. for natural gas is a growing energy security issue for the country. Sheinbaum has promised to boost clean energy – how effective will she be? Will she be able to address the country's growing power demands and energy infrastructure challenges? And will she break from her predecessor's lagging record on climate change? This week, host Bill Loveless talks with Carlos Pascual about what a Sheinbaum presidency could mean for Mexico's addressing the country's energy issues, and encouraging more investment in clean energy in Mexico. Carlos is senior vice president for Global Energy and International Affairs at S&P Global Commodity Insights, where he leads all business lines in Latin America. He was previously at IHS Markit, where he concentrated on worldwide energy issues and international affairs.  Carlos served as U.S. ambassador to Mexico from 2009 to 2011 and to Ukraine from 2000 to 2003. From 2011 to 2014 he was a special envoy and coordinator for international affairs at the U.S. Department of State, where he established and directed the agency's Energy Resources Bureau. He was also a former resident fellow at the Center on Global Energy Policy, Columbia SIPA.

So far this summer, politics has dominated the news. Which makes sense – it's a presidential election year after all. But climate change and its effects haven't gone anywhere and are getting worse. Just last week, Europe's climate change service Copernicus announced that Earth hit the hottest temperature ever recorded for two consecutive days.  The same service also said we've lived through more than a year now of record-breaking temperatures. During the June presidential debate, climate change did take center stage – but only for a moment. CNN moderators asked former President Donald Trump what he would do, if re-elected, to slow the climate crisis. His answer deviated quickly to other topics.  For his part, President Joe Biden – who has since announced he's leaving the race and endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris – played up his landmark Inflation Reduction Act, the largest investment in clean energy and climate action in U.S. history. But where is the American public in all this?  How worried, frustrated, or hopeful are people feeling about global warming? And how do those sentiments compare to other countries around the world?  This week we return to a conversation from last fall, when host Bill Loveless talked with Anthony Leiserowitz about Yale's Climate Change in the American Mind surveys, and what they reveal about public opinion around climate change both here in the U.S. and around the world. They also discussed the current discourse in American politics, and how attitudes differ among registered voters.  Anthony is the founder and director of the Yale University Program on Climate Change Communication, and a senior research scientist at the Yale School of the Environment. He has worked with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the National Academy of Sciences, the World Economic Forum, and many other major organizations to understand the psychological, cultural, and political factors that shape climate change beliefs. Anthony also hosts "Climate Connections," a daily 90-second podcast about the climate crisis. Since Bill's interview, Anthony's program at Yale has released its Spring 2024 Climate Change in the American Mind survey results for Beliefs & Attitudes and Politics & Policy.

On June 28, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a 40-year precedent established in the landmark 1984 case, Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council.  The precedent, commonly referred to as the “Chevron Doctrine,” gave federal agencies considerable discretion to interpret laws passed by Congress when implementing regulations and policy. But with the court's new ruling, federal agencies no longer have the final say on how laws are interpreted. Instead, the judiciary will hold that power.  So, how will the new ruling impact energy policy and environmental regulation? What are both proponents and opponents saying about the court's decision? And what does this mean more broadly for the modern administrative state?  This week host Bill Loveless talks with Michael Gerrard and Jeff Holmstead about the implications of the Supreme Court's decision to overturn the Chevron Doctrine. Michael is the founder and faculty director of Columbia's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. From 2012 to 2018, he was the chair of the faculty of Columbia University's Earth Institute. Before joining Columbia in 2009, Michael practiced environmental law in New York for three decades. Jeff is a partner and co-chair of the Environmental Strategies Group at Bracewell LLP. From 2001 to 2005, he served as the assistant administrator for air and radiation in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Throughout the world, climate change is influencing human mobility. In a 2022 report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found that devastating floods and storms have triggered the displacement of 20 million people per year since 2008. While migration is influenced by many factors, including socio-economic status and political stability, research by the IPCC and others tells us that climate change is increasingly significant. So, how is climate change impacting human mobility? And what can policymakers do to address climate migration?  This week host Bill Loveless talks with Shana Tabak about how climate change influences migration both within and across borders. Shana is a human rights lawyer and the director of immigration strategy at Emerson Collective, where she leads engagement at the intersection of global migration and the climate crisis. She is also an adjunct professor of human rights at the Georgetown University Law Center and an affiliated scholar with Georgetown's Institute for the Study of International Migration.

 In the next few months, heat waves, droughts, thunderstorms, and hurricanes will wreak havoc on regions around the world. Climate scientists say these events are becoming more extreme and dangerous thanks in part to the changing climate.  For example, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's outlook for the 2024 hurricane season, which just started June 1, anticipates an exceptionally high number of storms this year.  So, why are extreme weather events worsening? How is climate change contributing to this development? And what measures are being taken to adapt to this new reality?  This week host Bill Loveless talks with Radley Horton about the outlook for extreme weather events across the globe this summer, and why the intensity and severity of them is expected to increase. Radley is a professor at the Columbia Climate School, where he teaches and researches climate extremes, risks, impacts, and adaptation. He was a convening lead author for the United States' Third National Climate Assessment, and he is currently a principal investigator for NOAA, focusing on climate risk in the urban U.S. Northeast.

On May 8th, the U.S. Department of Energy proposed ten new “national interest electric transmission corridors” – a designation that allows the federal government to accelerate projects in areas where consumers are harmed by lack of transmission.  Days later, on the 13th, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission released Orders 1920 and 1977. Both of the new rules aim to expedite the build out of the nation's electric grid by tackling major issues such as cost allocation and long-term planning.  So, how will these actions from the federal government impact transmission projects? What are critics of the FERC rules saying? And why are these long-awaited reforms happening now?  This week host Bill Loveless talks with Rob Gramlich about the impact the new FERC rules will have on current and future transmission projects.  Rob is the founder and president of Grid Strategies, a consulting firm focused on transmission and power markets. He has co-founded multiple organizations focused on power systems reliability and sustainability, including Americans for a Clean Energy Grid and the Working for Advanced Transmission Technologies Coalition. From 2001-2005, Rob served as an economic advisor to FERC chairman Pat Wood.

Industry accounts for one-third of global greenhouse gas emissions, a share that will only increase in the coming years.  Other high-emission sectors, like electric power and transportation, are cutting emissions  through renewables and electrification. But the pathways to reducing emissions from manufacturing materials such as iron, steel, chemicals, cement, and concrete are still unclear.  A new book by Jeffrey Rissman, titled Zero-Carbon Industry: Transformative Technologies and Policies to Achieve Sustainable Prosperity., dives into the nuances of industrial decarbonization and lays out a roadmap for eliminating greenhouse gas emissions between 2050 and 2070.  So, what are some of the pathways for reducing manufacturing emissions? And how can policy support decarbonization?  This week host Bill Loveless talks with Jeffrey about his book and its look at the workings of heavy industrial polluters and the ways to affordably decarbonize manufacturing.  Jeffrey is the senior director of the industry program at Energy Innovation, a nonpartisan energy and climate policy firm, where he leads the company's work on technologies and policies to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions from the industry sector.  Zero-Carbon Industry is part of the Center on Global Energy Policy's book series, and is published by Columbia University Press. 

In April, the Environmental Protection Agency passed four new rules to reduce pollution from fossil fuel-fired power plants. One of the new rules requires many new gas and existing coal power plants to control 90 percent of their carbon pollution if they plan to operate beyond 2039. The other three rules specifically target coal, requiring the industry to clean up various parts of the value chain including toxic metal emissions from power generation, wastewater pollution, and coal ash management. And while the Biden Administration and other proponents consider the new rules a step in the right direction, opponents argue they will undermine the reliability of energy systems.    So, how will the EPA's new regulations impact the energy industry? What makes these standards different from previous attempts to regulate energy emissions? And how might opponents try to overturn them? This week host Bill Loveless talks with Jody Freeman about the technicalities of the new EPA power plant rules, and the legal avenues opponents might pursue to overturn them. Jody is the Archibald Cox professor of law and the founding director of the Harvard Law School Environmental & Energy Law Program. From 2009-2010, she served as a counselor for energy and climate change in the Obama White House. Jody has also previously served on the Advisory Council of the Electric Power Research Institute and as an independent director of ConocoPhillips.

Indonesia's economy is closely tied to its natural resources. It's the world's fourth largest producer of coal, and Southeast Asia's largest gas supplier.  But even with its connection to fossil fuels, the country's population strongly supports climate goals. In this year's presidential election, every candidate advocated for the energy transition and more renewables.  At the same time, like many developing countries, Indonesia needs energy security, increased access to energy, and affordability. These factors complicate the energy transition, and could prolong the use of existing fossil fuel infrastructure and abundant coal resources.  So, how can Indonesian policymakers balance economic development and the energy transition? What is the role of renewables in meeting the country's growing energy demands? And how can Indonesia collaborate in energy with other Asian nations? This week host Bill Loveless talks with Mari Pangestu about the efforts to build a clean energy economy in Indonesia.  Mari is a distinguished visiting fellow at the Center on Global Energy Policy. From 2020 to 2023, she served as the managing director of development policies and partnerships at the World Bank. Prior to joining the World Bank, Mari served as Indonesia's minister of trade and as minister of tourism and creative economy.

Across the U.S., large scale renewable energy projects, transmission lines, and mining sites for critical minerals are built on or near tribal lands. For example, the federal government plans to loan billions of dollars to Lithium Americas to develop a lithium mine in Nevada at a location known as Thacker Pass, sacred to local Paiute and Shoshone people.  With the tumultuous history of energy development on indigenous lands, many tribes are pushing back on citing new infrastructure on their land. So, how is the energy transition impacting Native American communities? And what are advocacy groups and the federal government doing to protect indigenous rights and lands? This week host Bill Loveless talks with Kate Finn about the contentious history of energy projects on Native American lands, how that history influences energy development today, and how her organization is working to ensure Native Americans have a seat at the table in determining how best to use indigenous lands.  Kate is the executive director of First Peoples Worldwide, an organization focused on upholding the rights, sovereignty, and economic power of Indigenous People around the world. She was the inaugural American Indian Law Program Fellow at the University of Colorado Law, where she worked directly with tribes and Native communities. Her recent work focuses on the impacts of development in Indigenous communities, and embedding respect for Indigenous peoples into routine business operations.

Cleaner alternatives to the oil and gas that power vital industries are necessary for economy-wide decarbonization. E-fuels, or electrofuels, are touted as a carbon neutral solution for the hard-to-decarbonize sectors that rely on energy dense fossil fuels.  E-fuels are made by combining hydrogen with carbon dioxide. Through the electrolysis process, water is split into oxygen and hydrogen atoms. The hydrogen is then combined with CO2 through a process called synthesis. The outcome is an energy-dense liquid, synthetic fuel.  But currently, the e-fuels production process makes these alternatives more expensive than fossil fuels. And when burned, they release CO2, making critics question the claims of climate neutrality.  So, what is the climate impact of e-fuels? What industries are turning to these alternatives for decarbonization? And how can policy and tax incentives make them cost competitive with conventional oil and gas?  This week host Bill Loveless talks with Meg Gentle about the use of e-fuels for transport.  Meg is the executive director of HIF Global, an e-fuel company developing some of the largest projects around the world. Before joining HIF, Meg served as the director of Ovintiv, an independent petroleum company, and as the president and CEO of the natural gas company Tellurian. She also spent ten years working for Cheniere Energy, helping grow their LNG marketing and trading company into a world-wide business.  

On March 6, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) adopted new rules to standardize climate-related disclosures for public business and public offerings. Hoping to provide investors with consistent and comparable information, the Commission's new rules require companies to disclose emissions and the expenses and losses associated with climate risks in annual filings and reports.  But critics immediately balked at the rules, questioning its legality and effectiveness.  So, how does the SEC define climate-related risks? How do their disclosure requirements compare to similar rules passed in the EU and California? And what are the critics saying?  This week host Bill Loveless talks with Shiva Rajgopal about the SEC's climate disclosure ruling and his Forbes' column on the topic, “The SEC's New Climate Rule Is A Reasonable Political Compromise In An Election Year”.   Shiva is the Kester and Byrnes Professor of Accounting and Auditing at Columbia Business School. His research interests span financial reporting, earnings quality, fraud, executive compensation and corporate culture. From 2017-2019, Shiva served as the vice dean of research for Columbia Business School and has been a faculty member at Duke University, Emory University, and the University of Washington.

For more than a century, extractive industry and capitalism have dominated the developed world's economies. Some of the biggest companies in the world produce and sell oil and gas, and those commodities have made countries and people very wealthy. But they're also a major source of pollution and contributor to the climate crisis. In response, many of these companies have started investing in renewable energy, others have completely shifted their focus to clean solutions.  Akshat Rathi's new book Climate Capitalism delves into this shift and argues that saving the earth is economically more advantageous than destroying it.  So, what is climate capitalism? How can this new approach facilitate climate innovation and economic growth? And what will it take to move away from traditional capitalism?  This week host Bill Loveless talks with Akshat about his new book and how reforming the current economic system can address climate change and be profitable. Akshat is a senior climate reporter for Bloomberg News. Prior to Bloomberg, he was a senior reporter at Quartz and a science editor at The Conversation. His new book, Climate Capitalism: Winning the Race to Zero Emissions and Solving the Crisis of our Age has been named one of the best books of the year by the The London Times and The Economic Times. 

In a new partnership with Google, the Environmental Defense Fund has developed a satellite that will orbit the Earth fifteen times a day and monitor methane emissions. The satellite, called MethaneSAT, will provide specific data on which parts of oil and gas infrastructure are the biggest methane emitters. Using artificial intelligence, MethaneSAT will overlay emissions data on oil and gas infrastructure maps to pinpoint the components that are responsible for methane leaks.  So, what are the implications of this new methane detection technology? And can it be expanded to detect other greenhouse gasses? This week host Bill Loveless talks with EDF's Steve Hamburg about the capabilities of MethaneSAT, and how they differ from other satellites that detect methane. Steve is the chief scientist and a senior vice president at the Environmental Defense Fund. He leads the organization's work to quantify methane emissions and understand the impacts on air pollution and human health. Before joining EDF in 2008, he was an environmental science professor at University of Kansas and Brown University, where he was the founding director of the Global Environment Program. He has also served as a lead author for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and was acknowledged as one of the contributing recipients of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.

Brazil is in a strategic position when it comes to energy and climate issues. It holds the presidency of the G20 nations this year and the UN climate talks – or COP30 – in 2025. This comes as the nation sees a significant reduction in deforestation in the Amazon rainforest under President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and new commitments to pursue low-carbon technologies, such as hydrogen, and establish a regulated carbon market. At the same time, Brazil, the biggest producer of oil in Latin America, is planning to ramp up its output. So, how is the energy transition unfolding in Brazil? And how can the country balance environmental protection and energy security?  This week host Bill Loveless talks with Thiago Barral about how Brazil plans to build up clean energy technologies, and how geopolitics shapes that strategy. Thiago is the national secretary of planning and energy transition of the Ministry of Mines and Energy for Brazil. Before his role as secretary, Thiago was the president of the Energy Research Company, a Brazilian institution responsible for energy planning studies and official state energy statistics. He joined the Energy Research Company in 2007, and also served as director of energy economics and environmental studies.

Against the backdrop of climate change, a global debt crisis is raising concerns about the cost of the energy transition. Countries in the Global South — which are trying to balance economic development and climate adaptation — are calling for reforms to the global financial system to get more access to cheaper capital.   The World Bank, which provides loans and grants to emerging and developing economies, is a major financier of international development. Last year, it delivered $38.6 billion in climate finance. But because of its significant capacity, the organization is often scrutinized for how it manages and allocates funds. So, how can the global financial system better support emerging and developing economies amid a changing climate? And how is the World Bank under a new president, Ajay Banga, working to meet these challenges?  This week host Bill Loveless talks with Axel van Trotsenburg about the World Bank's climate agenda.  Axel is the World Bank's senior managing director, responsible for development policies and partnerships. As such, he is the second in command at the bank. He directs the organization's core work on sustainable development, with a focus on climate change, fragility, human capital, and sustainable debt. Axel has been with the World Bank for more than 30 years, having also held various senior positions there.

For more than three decades, the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has prepared comprehensive scientific assessments about the drivers and risks of climate change. The assessments, released every five to seven years, also explain how mitigation and adaptation could reduce those risks.  To confront the growing urgency of the climate crisis, governments around the world turn to the IPCC for guidance on emissions reductions strategies. That said, the organization makes clear that its research is not meant to be prescriptive.  So, how do its findings support climate policy and action around the world? And what role does science play in shaping global climate negotiations?  This week host Bill Loveless talks with IPCC's Jim Skea about how the organization's research contributes to public policy.  Jim is the chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Before his election as chair in July 2023, he was the co-chair of Working Group III of the IPCC, which focuses on climate change mitigation. Jim also served as the chair of Scotland's Just Transition Commission from 2018 to 2023 and was a founding member of the United Kingdom's Committee on Climate Change.