This past year has reminded all of us that the energy transition, energy markets, and geopolitics are inextricably linked. In the last five years alone, extreme volatility in energy prices has created uncertainty for consumers and producers alike.
For Wall Street in particular, an uncertain energy outlook brings up important questions about risk and strategy. Aligning energy investment with expected demand is hard, especially in the midst of an energy transition that’s happening in fits and starts. Yet, effective investment is vital for both energy access and climate progress.
How should investors address the tension between energy and climate needs? What do the coming years hold for oil and gas markets? And is the term “energy transition” even the right one?
This week host Jason Bordoff talks with Arjun Murti about how Wall Street views the energy transition and how the turbulence has wracked energy markets over the past several years. Arjun shares the lessons he’s learned in his years as an energy markets analyst, and how his experiences inform his view of the path ahead.
Arjun has spent more than 30 years analyzing the global energy sector on Wall Street. He spent 15 years as a partner at Goldman Sachs and recently served as senior advisor and now partner for Veriten. Has also had stints as director at ConocoPhillips and as senior advisor for Warburg Pincus. Arjun is also on the Center on Global Energy Policy’s advisory board.
Almost 30% of electricity in the western United States comes from hydroelectric dams. But what happens when the water in the rivers dries up?
The Western Area Power Administration – or WAPA – provides electricity to more than 40 million Americans. It relies heavily on the 57 dams in its service territory for supply.
But over the past 20 years, the drought ravaging the West has been drying up reservoirs. Even the recent wave of snow and rain that dumped on western states like California won’t be enough to fill them back up.
New transmission projects, which WAPA can help build, could provide more connection from the western power grid to the east. And that would help stabilize the electricity supply.
So, how is WAPA planning to serve its customers in the face of a changing climate? And what role does transmission infrastructure play in meeting their needs?
This week, host Bill Loveless talks with Tracey LeBeau about how drought has affected WAPA’s operations in the past few years. They also discuss how the power generation will change moving forward and how transmission needs of the West might be met.
Tracey is the administrator and chief executive officer of the Western Area Power Administration. She joined the organization in 2014 as manager of the Transmission Infrastructure Program, where she oversaw WAPA’s $3.2 billion borrowing authority. Tracey has also served as senior vice president at WAPA and was responsible for managing transmission system operations and maintenance.
The Inflation Reduction Act, passed last year, aims to accelerate the clean energy transition, and benefit American workers, communities, and manufacturers. It does so by providing large amounts of funding to the domestic clean energy sector, paired with certain requirements for materials and technologies to be produced in the U.S.. But accelerating climate action is a big task, to say nothing of fostering economic fairness and opportunity in the process.
How can the Biden administration move forward on all these different priorities simultaneously? How will its domestic climate agenda impact the U.S. economy? And what is the role of industrial policy in a world undergoing an energy transition?
This week host Jason Bordoff talks with Heather Boushey about the nuances of the Biden administration’s domestic climate policy and how it fits into their broader economic plans. They also discuss what it means to use industrial policy in furtherance of the energy transition.
Heather is currently a member of the Council of Economic Advisors for the Biden administration and chief economist to the Biden administration’s “Invest in America” cabinet. Heather works on domestic investment and implementation of infrastructure and clean energy laws. She previously co-founded the Washington Center for Equitable Growth, where she served as chief economist, president and CEO. She has also held the position of chief economist for the Center for American Progress.
States’ net zero and clean-energy goals are requiring the electricity sector to reduce emissions. Getting there means building new renewable energy projects and then connecting them to cities. But the grid is congested and needs more capacity for renewables and secure power supplies. New transmission lines could solve that problem.
Private transmission developers are looking to build high-voltage, direct-current lines across multiple states. Among them is Michael Skelly. A decade ago, his company Clean Line Energy attempted to do this. Now he’s back with another venture, Grid United.
More cross-country connections would boost reliability and help get more renewable energy online. However, addressing different regulatory environments, stakeholder interests, and landowners—an important part of the process—make interstate transmission hard to build. Even with these challenges, long distance projects have been making headway.
So, why is it important to build transmission across the country? Why are private developers taking on the task? And what’s causing these projects to gain momentum in recent months?
This week host Bill Loveless talks with Michael Skelly about the nation’s transmission needs and how the development landscape has changed over the years. They discuss why momentum is growing to build more multi-state lines.
Michael is the founder and CEO of Grid United. The company is currently involved in the North Plains Corridor project, which would be the first transmission connection between three regional U.S. electric energy markets in the Midwest, West, and Southwest.
With Russian oil and gas deliveries a fraction of what they were before the war in Ukraine, Norway has emerged as a key source of energy. The state-owned energy company, Equinor, has helped expand oil and gas production to fill the gap left by Russia.
Meanwhile, the urgency of acting on climate change continues to grow. In the wake of Russia’s invasion, European governments and others are strengthening their renewable energy targets in a bid to tackle climate change and enhance their energy security.
Equinor, with a strong renewables business, wants to be a leader in the energy transition.
What does the road ahead look like for a company like Equinor? And what does it tell us about where Europe is headed?
This week host Jason Bordoff talks with Anders Opedal about Equinor’s response to the war in Ukraine and the subsequent European energy crisis. They also discuss the company’s goal to reach net-zero by 2050.
Anders has been the president and CEO of Equinor since August 2020. The energy company is responsible for 70% of oil and gas production in Norway and was instrumental in Norway becoming Europe’s largest source of natural gas.
When President Jimmy Carter addressed the nation on April 18, 1977, the U.S. was in a crisis. The Arab oil embargo of 1973 sent energy prices soaring, and four years later, the impacts were still rippling through the economy.
In his speech, President Carter called the crisis “the moral equivalent of war” and called on Americans to conserve energy. He outlined a plan to tackle the crisis, focusing on conservation, efficiency, and domestic technologies to reduce dependence on foreign oil.
President Carter signed energy legislation that created the U.S. Department of Energy, provided incentives for renewables and coal, deregulated oil and natural gas prices, and banned new power plants from using gas or oil. Some of these policies have had a lasting effect. Others drew criticism and were ultimately repealed.
So what is President Carter’s energy policy legacy? And how do the lessons of the ’70s help address energy challenges today?
This week, host Bill Loveless talks with Jay Hakes about how the energy crisis shaped Jimmy Carter’s presidency and the policies his administration enacted.
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 stint as director of the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Jay is the author of the book Energy Crises: Nixon, Ford, Carter, and Hard Choices in the 1970s.
Western countries are once again trying to reduce their reliance on Russian resources. This time it’s nuclear fuel.
Russia accounts for a substantial share of both conversion and enrichment services worldwide. These two processes turn uranium into usable fuel. The war in Ukraine has raised concerns about supply disruptions – like shipping and payment, and government actions that could ban fuel imports.
Still, the West has struggled to sever ties with Russia’s nuclear industry. Attempts at sanctions have faltered because of limited domestic capabilities to process uranium in the U.S and Europe. But as the war continues, the U.S., Europe and other nations are weighing options to make them less dependent on Russia's nuclear industry.
So what are the alternatives to Russian conversion and enrichment services? How will changing supply chains impact the stability of the global nuclear fuel market?
This week host Bill Loveless talks with Jonathan Hinze and Bill Freebairn.
Jonathan is the president of UxC LLC, a market research and analysis company covering the nuclear industry. He has nearly two decades of experience working in the U.S. and Japan on technology development, international markets, and government policies.
Bill is a senior managing editor for S&P Global Commodity Insights, where he writes about nuclear plant construction and operation, regulatory developments, financial issues and uranium markets. He leads the Nucleonics Week publication, which is a source of global news for the commercial nuclear power business.
Both guests talk with Bill about how Russia came to dominate global nuclear fuel production and why it’s so difficult for other countries to find alternative supplies.
A push for stronger climate policy should unite Americans and Europeans. It might be raising trade tensions instead.
The Inflation Reduction Act was a signal that America is a serious player in global climate negotiations. European countries, however, worried the bill would be a threat to their domestic manufacturers and took their complaints directly to the Biden Administration.
The EU responded by proposing a Green Deal Industrial Plan, which will match American subsidies to clean-energy manufacturers. European officials are also pursuing a green tariff in 2026, which would tax imports of carbon-intensive goods.
How will this transatlantic industrial arms race play out? And will it cause trade disputes between the U.S. and EU to escalate?
This week, host Bill Loveless talks with Noah Kaufman and Sagatom Saha.
Noah is an economist and research scholar at the Center on Global Energy Policy. He served as a senior economist at the Council of Economic Advisers under President Biden. He also served as the deputy associate director of energy and climate change at the White House Council on Environmental Quality under President Obama.
Sagatom is an adjunct research scholar at the Center on Global Energy Policy and is an expert on the global energy transition and America’s competitiveness in clean energy technologies. He previously worked on cleantech competitiveness at the International Trade Administration in the U.S. Department of Commerce, and served as an adviser to John Kerry, the U.S. special presidential envoy for climate.
Noah, Sagatom, and two of their colleagues, Chris Bataille and Gautum Jain, recently published an article in The Conversation about how conflicting carbon tariffs could undermine climate efforts. Bill talks with them about the details of the U.S. and EU's domestic industrial policies, and why tensions are flaring between them.
Federal funding for environmental justice is beginning to flow.
The Biden administration came into office in 2021 determined to make environmental justice a major priority. President Biden jump started his agenda with a slew of executive orders and the Justice40 Initiative, an effort to address historical underinvestment in disadvantaged communities most impacted by climate change, pollution, and environmental hazards.
Now, with the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill, Washington has the money and programs to act on environmental justice. Just last month, the Environmental Protection Agency announced $100 million in grants for state and community organizations to address local environmental and public health issues.
How does the federal government decide what projects qualify for environmental justice funding? And how can environmental activists ensure the money is well spent?
This week host Bill Loveless talks with Bob Bullard and Maria Lopez-Nunez.
Bob is a pioneering figure in environmental justice. He is the founding director of the Bullard Center for Environmental and Climate Justice and distinguished professor of urban planning and environmental policy at Texas Southern University. He serves on the White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council.
Maria is the deputy director of organizing and advocacy of Ironbound Community Corporation. She was part of a team that fought for New Jersey to pass landmark environmental justice legislation. Maria also serves on the White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council.
Together, they discuss the momentum building behind the environmental justice movement and how a new influx of money could shape energy infrastructure projects.
The U.S has used sanctions to influence geopolitics for decades, including measures targeting the oil and gas trade. Most recently, the U.S. and other G7 nations put a price cap on Russian oil as punishment for its invasion of Ukraine.
In the past, sanctions focused on trade embargos—like the grain embargo against the Soviet Union in 1980 and much broader restrictions against Cuba in 1960. Today, they focus on financial impacts. It’s an effective strategy for a country with significant global financial clout like the U.S., but unilateral sanctions can fuel tensions with allies and result in unintended consequences.
So how does the U.S. use financial pressure to address conflicts with other nations? What are the geopolitical and economic impacts of current sanctions? And how could they affect America’s standing in the global order?
Today on the show, Bill talks with Agathe Demarais, global forecasting director of the Economist Intelligence Unit and former economic advisor for the diplomatic corps of the French Treasury.
Agathe is the author of Backfire: How Sanctions Reshape the World Against U.S. Interests. The book explores how sanctions affect multinational companies, governments, and millions of people around the world. It’s part of the Center on Global Energy Policy’s book series published by the Columbia University Press.
Bill speaks with Agathe about what’s in the U.S sanctions arsenal and why they’ve become so popular in the past two decades. They also discuss the use of sanctions as a foreign policy tool in the past, present, and future.
Innovation in clean energy is accelerating. Batteries are getting denser and cheaper; wind turbines are getting bigger and better, and new solar projects often generate the cheapest electricity in the world.
Meanwhile, cutting-edge technologies like hydrogen electrolysis and direct-air carbon capture keep improving.
Most of the world’s major economies – the US, EU, India, Japan, and China – are racing to capture the economic benefits of this tech innovation through deployment incentives and support of domestic manufacturing.
But bottlenecks for critical minerals, supply chain constraints from Covid, and fierce competition among countries are all potential hurdles for this new industrial age.
Where is clean energy innovation advancing the fastest? And how will competition over manufacturing shake out in the decade ahead?
This week host Bill Loveless talks with Timur Gül.
Timur is head of the Energy Technology Policy Division at the International Energy Agency and leads the Energy Technology Perspectives report. The flagship series serves as the world’s first global guidebook for the clean technology industries of the future. The 2023 version was just released earlier this month.
Timur gives us an insider’s look into the report. He and Bill discuss how the key findings fit into the current geopolitical atmosphere of energy markets. They also talk about the major opportunities both globally and domestically for technology innovation.
After years of political pressure, Democrats in Congress narrowly passed an historic climate bill at the end of 2022. Now, it’s time to implement it.
The Departments of Energy, Interior, Treasury, IRS, EPA, and state governments are set to deploy hundreds of billions of dollars for clean energy technologies. That means hiring lots of people into government, structuring new programs, and distributing dollars efficiently.
But the politics aren't over. With a Republican-controlled House, other pressures are emerging. The House Energy Committee has plans to investigate President Biden’s energy and climate actions. The DOE’s Loan Programs Office is under attack for its spending, which was recently increased by the Inflation Reduction Act. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will only have four commissioners instead of five because of objections over re-nominating Chairman Richard Glick.
How will these conflicts play out? And how will the actual work of implementing the Inflation Reduction Act get done?
This week Jennifer Dlouhy and Stephen Mufson join host Bill Loveless to discuss what to expect out of Washington D.C. this year.
Jennifer has been an energy and environment reporter for Bloomberg in Washington, D.C. since 2015. She has more than fifteen years of experience covering energy policy.
Stephen covers the business of climate change for the Washington Post. In his 30 years at the Post, he’s covered economic policy, China, diplomacy, energy and the White House.
With seemingly low possibilities to pass major climate and energy legislation, Bill, Jennifer, and Stephen discuss what the Biden administration and Republicans could focus on this year. They also talk about the role federal agencies will play.
Clean electrons are vital to the net-zero economy. What about molecules?
There is a global race to expand hydrogen production for industry and heavy transportation – using wind, solar and biomass as a feedstock.
North American countries are taking hydrogen innovation seriously, passing policy to spur innovation. The United States’ Inflation Reduction Act and Canada’s Fall Economic Statement both offer production tax credits for clean hydrogen.
China is the global leader in production. But the country primarily uses coal as a feedstock. To make it clean, they’ll need to invest heavily in renewables and carbon capture technology.
With so much attention now on the industry, will it finally live up to the hype? How have recent developments in geopolitics and policy changed the outlook for the hydrogen industry? And what sectors will it help decarbonize?
This week host Bill Loveless talks with Daryl Wilson, the executive director of the Hydrogen Council.
Before joining the Hydrogen Council in 2020, Daryl served as CEO of Hydrogenics, a fuel cell and electrolysis technologies provider. During his time there, he oversaw the world’s largest new electrolysis project and the world’s first hydrogen powered public train service.
In 2017 the Hydrogen Council released its first report – an outlook through 2050. Bill talks to Daryl about whether that outlook has changed with the recent instability of global energy markets and the war in Ukraine. They also discuss how new policy developments could spur innovation.
Developing countries face the dual challenge of meeting rapidly growing energy demand while also scaling clean energy to avoid dramatic increases in carbon emissions. But financing all of those clean energy projects can be tough.
Emerging and developing economies need clean energy investments. Researchers estimate that they will need anywhere between $1-2 trillion per year for the next 30 years to reach net-zero emissions by 2050.
Most of that capital will need to come from the private sector. Multilateral development banks are working to fill the gap and catalyze private finance. But they still have to work through unique financial, policy, and technical challenges in emerging and developing economies.
So what are these barriers? And how do we overcome them to mobilize more capital for clean energy projects across the developing world?
This week, we’re re-running host Jason Bordoff’s interview with Mafalda Duarte. Mafalda is the CEO of Climate Investment Funds, one of the most ambitious efforts to finance clean energy projects in developing and middle-income countries.
In September, Jason and Mafalda discussed opportunities for financing the clean energy transition in emerging economies—including an ambitious new effort to phase out coal in parts of Africa and Asia.
So much about the ocean is still unknown to science, even though the ocean covers 70 percent of the earth’s surface.
Oceans act as a buffer against unimaginable warming, because scientists say that about 90 percent of the warming that has happened on Earth over the past 50 years has been absorbed by the oceans. But elevated ocean temperatures have also meant rising seas, coral bleaching events, and more intense hurricanes — just to name a few impacts.
That said, ocean science has increasingly contributed significantly to addressing climate change and informing public policy.
And there’s that much more that can be done.
This week, we have host Bill Loveless' conversation with Peter De Menocal from February this year. Peter is a marine geologist and paleo-climatologist and the President & Director of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.
Bill and Peter discussed how oceans are changing, the capacity of oceans to take up carbon and the need for policy-relevant research on the seas. They also talked about what led Peter to a career studying and exploring oceans.
2022 was one of the most tumultuous years for global energy markets in decades.War. Fossil fuel shortages. Extreme price spikes. Supply chain disruptions in clean energy.
It also brought transformative changes. An historic U.S. climate bill, a first-of-its-kind loss and damage agreement at COP27, and record electric car sales. We tackled all these stories on the show this year. Now we’re wondering: how will they play out next year?
Will supply chains return to normal after their COVID chaos? How volatile will fossil fuel prices remain? And what kind of technological breakthroughs can we expect in clean energy?
This week, a 2022 wrap-up. Host Bill Loveless is joined by a panel of experts from the Center on Global Energy Policy – Jason Bordoff, Melissa Lott, and Mauricio Cardenas.
Jason is the founding director of the Center on Global Energy Policy and co-founding dean of the Columbia Climate School. Before joining Columbia, he served as special assistant to President Barack Obama, and as senior director for energy and climate change on the staff of the National Security Council. And, of course, he is the co-host of this show.
Melissa is the director of research at the Center on Global Energy Policy. She co-leads the Power Sector and Renewable Research Initiative and serves as the acting director of the Carbontech Development Initiative. Melissa is the host of “The Big Switch,” another podcast by the Center on Global Energy Policy.
Mauricio is a professor of professional practice in global leadership at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs and director of the school’s Master of Public Administration in Global Leadership. He has previously served Colombia’s energy minister and finance minister.
Together, they discuss the year’s biggest moments at the intersection of energy, policy, and geopolitics. They also talk about Europe’s energy challenges, global climate and energy policies – including the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act – and the trajectory for fossil fuels and renewables in the years ahead.
Sixty dollars. That’s the per-barrel price cap G7 countries and Australia imposed on Russian crude oil last week. The measure will allow Western service providers to ship and insure Russian oil, as long as it’s sold at a price below the cap. The purpose is to reduce Russia’s petro-revenue, which funds its war on Ukraine, while still keeping its oil flowing to the global market.
This measure breaks new ground as a tool of economic statecraft. Analysts around the world are anxiously watching to see how the oil market – and the Russians – might respond.
Will the price cap achieve its objective? And what does this mean for the future of energy policy?
This week host Jason Bordoff talks with Eddie Fishman and Tatiana Mitrova.
Eddie is a senior research scholar at the Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP) at Columbia University and an adjunct professor of international and public affairs. He previously led the U.S. State Department’s design and implementation of sanctions on Russia. You can find two explainers he wrote about the price cap on Russian oil on CGEP’s website.
Tatiana is senior research fellow at CGEP and one of the world’s foremost experts on the Russian energy sector. She has served as executive director of the Energy Centre of the Moscow School of Management and as head of research in the Oil and Gas Department in the Energy Research Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Eddie, Tatiana, and Jason talk about what the price cap could look like in practice, and how Russia might respond. They also discuss the impact of sanctions already in place.
The clean energy transition is a multi-generational challenge. It will shake up geopolitics, shift the economy, and change our daily interactions with energy. We have no precedent for the scale and speed required to decarbonize the global economy.
Yet there are signs that new developments in technology, policy, and public opinion are turning the tide for a global response to the climate crisis. Achieving a net-zero future, however, will require careful implementation, creative solutions, and a whole-systems approach that prioritizes prosperity and justice.
What are the economic tools we have to deliver such a transition? And what are the emerging solutions that might make this future possible?
This week host Jason Bordoff talks with Cameron Hepburn.
Cameron is a professor of environmental economics at the University of Oxford and director of the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment. He also serves as the director of the Economics of Sustainability Programme based at the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School. Cameron has more than 30 peer-reviewed publications spanning economics, public policy, law, engineering, philosophy, and biology.
Jason and Cameron talk about where we are in the energy transition – and where we need to go. They discuss the economics of the climate crisis, how technology developments are accelerating the energy transition, and how to scale their impact.
War. Inflation. Supply shortfalls. The global energy system looks much different than a year ago, thanks to a confluence of disruptive forces for oil and natural gas. Ever-cheaper renewables, electric cars, and stronger climate policies are putting peak fossil fuel consumption in sight.
How will these competing factors play out in the coming decade and beyond?
This fall, the International Energy Agency (IEA) published the latest version of its flagship report, the World Energy Outlook (WEO). It examines the state of the global energy system and maps out a variety of decarbonization scenarios for the future.
This week host Jason Bordoff talks with Laura Cozzi. Laura is the chief energy modeler at the IEA . She also serves as the head of the demand outlook division, and is responsible for producing the annual World Energy Outlook. Laura has been with the IEA for more than 20 years and has co-authored multiple editions of the WEO.
Jason talks with Laura about this year’s analysis – and the various scenarios outlined in the report. They discuss the prospect for a peak in fossil fuel consumption, the impact of increased investments in clean energy, and the long-term impacts of today’s supply crisis.
The November midterm elections proved better than expected for Democrats, in spite of many predictions of a Republican wave sweeping across the United States.
Regardless of what happens in the Georgia run-off in December, Democrats will hold a majority in the Senate.
Republicans, however, have taken a narrow majority in the House of Representatives, where they can contest President Biden’s climate and energy agenda. Most notably, they could try to minimize the impacts of the Inflation Reduction Act and other new laws through oversight and investigations into its funding for various agencies.
How will climate and energy policy shake out over the last two years of President Biden’s term? Will the administration look to regulatory agencies like the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission to move the needle on climate action with a split Congress?
This week host Bill Loveless talks with Rich Powell and Aliya Haq.
Rich is the CEO of Clear Path and Clear Path Action. Both are DC-based organizations advancing policies that accelerate innovations to reduce emissions in the energy and industrial sectors. He is also the co-chair of the Conservative Climate Foundation.
Aliya is the vice president of U.S. policy and advocacy at Breakthrough Energy. Her team pushes for ambitious climate and clean energy policy to help the U.S. achieve its goal of net-zero emissions by 2050. Previously, she was the federal climate policy director for the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Bill spoke with Rich and Aliya about the election results and how they will impact policy over the next two years. They discussed the possibility of bipartisan action and how a Republican House could influence energy and environmental agencies.
The spotlight is on Africa at COP27, the UN climate change conference taking place in Egypt.
This year, climate-induced disasters have ravaged the continent. Cyclones and flooding in the south, and a four-year drought in the east have crippled food supplies, increased human suffering, and hurt economic growth.
Meanwhile, hundreds of millions of Africans still live in energy poverty. With pressure from developed nations to cut emissions at global climate talks, African leaders are hoping to secure billions of dollars to invest in the transition away from fossil fuels and build new energy infrastructure.
But securing financing to build renewable energy projects isn't enough. For the first time in its history, the COP agenda includes “loss and damage” funds. These are reparations that industrialized countries would pay to developing countries which have suffered the most from climate change.
What will it take to bring about meaningful energy transitions in Africa? And do the energy developments underway give us some insight on what’s possible?
This week host Bill Loveless talks with Dr. Destenie Nock. Destenie is an assistant professor at Carnegie Mellon University where she teaches civil and environmental engineering as well as engineering and public policy. She is also newly appointed to Columbia’s Visiting Faculty Program.
Destenie recently co-authored a report about energy poverty in Africa in the journal Nature titled “Africa needs context-relevant evidence to shape its clean energy future.”
Bill and Destenie spoke about her research, and the nuanced energy and climate needs of African nations. They discuss ‘loss and damage’ and the previously unfulfilled promises from wealthy countries to fund climate mitigation projects.
To produce these vehicles, manufacturers need critical minerals like cobalt, lithium, and nickel for their batteries. China is a major player in battery manufacturing because of its capacity for processing these minerals.
The European Union is close to striking a deal to ban new combustion-engine cars starting in 2035. Earlier this summer, the California Air Resources Board passed a new mandate for EVs, effectively phasing out the sale of gasoline-powered cars by 2035.
With the United States and Europe both aiming to bolster their domestic supply chains, the contest for critical minerals is also heating up. What will it take to produce these minerals in sufficient quantities? And how can it be done in ways that protect the environment and the mining communities?
This week host Bill Loveless talks with Henry Sanderson, the executive editor at Benchmark Mineral Intelligence. From 2014 to 2021, he served as the commodities correspondent for the Financial Times. He also spent seven years in China reporting for Bloomberg and the Associated Press.
In July, Henry published a new book, “Volt Rush: The Winners and Losers in the Race to Go Green”. Volt Rush is about the geopolitics and competition over the commodities needed to build a greener world.
Bill talks with Henry about the competitive global market of EV battery components and the often overlooked working and environmental conditions in developing countries. They also discuss efforts by the United States and other countries to build domestic supply chains.
Europe is getting some much-needed relief in the midst of its energy crisis. Although energy prices are still high, a warm October and a surge in liquified gas imports brought spot prices down from record levels and gas storage to near full capacity. A worst-case supply crisis has been averted — for now.
But tensions are still high. Fears over Russian sabotage of North Sea pipelines are causing concerns about cuts to remaining gas supplies. Impending winter weather and a coming embargo on Russian oil are adding uncertainty to an already volatile market. European households and businesses will still see prices for natural gas and electricity well above average.
Has Europe seen the worst of its energy crisis? What are the options for EU leaders to manage the energy crisis during the frigid winter months? How will further measures to pressure Russia economically affect the European economy?
This week host Jason Bordoff talks with Anne-Sophie Corbeau and Tatiana Mitrova about the winter outlook and the options for managing the energy supply. This conversation was recorded on October 14, 2022.
Anne-Sophie is a global research scholar at the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs.
Tatiana is a research fellow at the Center on Global Energy Policy.
The group of 23 oil-producing countries known as OPEC+ announced a cut in production at its recent meeting in Vienna. The move sparked a sharp backlash from leaders in Washington amid concerns about high energy prices and their impact on the global economy.
OPEC+ countries, particularly Saudi Arabia, defended the decision by pointing to the weak economic outlook depressing oil demand. Others concluded geopolitics may have been at play given the relationship between OPEC+ countries and Russia.
In Washington, calls for retaliation were immediate. Proposals included a cessation of arms sales to Saudi Arabia, legislation to strip OPEC+ of its immunity from antitrust lawsuits, or new releases from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
Was the market in need of a production cut? And how much did geopolitics play a role in OPEC+’s decision?
This week host Jason Bordoff talks with Amrita Sen.
Amrita is the co-founder and chief oil analyst at Energy Aspects. She leads their analysis and forecasting of crude and products markets. Amrita was formerly the chief oil analyst at Barclays Capital. She holds a masters in economics from the University of Cambridge and a PhD in economics from SOAS University of London.
Amrita’s deep understanding of the complexity of the global energy sector, along with a wealth of industry contacts and experience, gives her a unique perspective on market outlook. Earlier this month, she warned clients that U.S. shale output could peak in 2024.
Together, Jason and Amrita discuss the rationale behind the OPEC+ cuts and the influence of geopolitics. They also talk about the U.S. response and production outlook for the next few years.
In the months since Russia invaded Ukraine, world leaders have struggled to implement a global response that punishes Russia for its aggression, while simultaneously minimizing the war’s impact on energy prices. In the United States, the Department of the Treasury has been at the center of this effort. Officials there have been negotiating with international partners over a proposal to implement a price cap on Russian oil. Their goal? To reduce Russia’s energy revenue while keeping vitally needed oil on the market.
A price cap would allow those transporting Russian oil to use western services if buyers pay below a set price. But some experts are skeptical. Can the United States really punish Russian aggression while protecting the economies of consumer countries? What are the chances of Russian retaliation? And how would a global price cap affect energy prices for American consumers in the months ahead?
This week, we’re airing a conversation between host Jason Bordoff and Wally Adeyemo at the recent Columbia Global Energy Summit.
As deputy secretary of the Treasury, Wally has been at the center of the Biden Administration’s Covid recovery effort, its response to Russian aggression, and its stewardship of the American economy.
Prior to taking over as deputy secretary, Wally served as deputy national security adviser for International Economics and deputy director of the National Economic Council for the Obama Administration. He was also the first chief of staff of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Jason and Wally discuss the price cap proposal, the outlook for energy markets, and how the Department of the Treasury is using its economic policy levers to address the climate crisis.