March 21, 2025 • 49 mins
On this episode of The Middle, we ask you what the future of American energy should look like. Jeremy is joined by former Colorado Governor Bill Ritter Jr., who founded the Center for the New Energy Economy at Colorado State University, and Colorado Oil & Gas CEO and President Lynn Granger. DJ Tolliver joins as well, plus calls from around the country. #energy #greenenergy #renewable #solar #gas #oil #drillbabydrill
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
The Middle is supported by Journalism Funding Partners, a nonprofit
organization striving to increase the sustainability of local journalism by
building connections between donors and news organizations. More information on
how you can support The Middle at Listen to Them
Middle dot com. Welcome to the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson
(00:20):
in Denver, Colorado, this week along with our house DJ
Tolliver and Tolliver Fun fact, Denver is consistently at the
top of the list of cities with the most downloads
of The Middle podcast.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
Really, you know what, that doesn't surprise me. I'm not
sure why it doesn't, but it doesn't surprise me. It
also has some of the best neighborhood acronyms out there.
So you got rhino, you got logo that's a tough one,
and lo high.
Speaker 1 (00:44):
It's and you don't have Soda Sopa, which was South
Park's fake south of downtown south So I've already got
I haven't even introduced our guests, and they're already laughing
at my jokes. So Colorado is actually the perfect place
to talk about the future of American energy because it
is both one of the the largest producers of oil
and gas in the country and also a hub for
clean energy production and research that's wind, solar, geothermal. The
(01:08):
state is also home to dozens of climate tech startups
and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. It is worth noting, however,
that coal and natural gas still play a huge role
in generating the state's power, something that is reflected across
the country as well. Eighty three percent of our energy
nationally still comes from fossil fuels, and while the Biden
(01:29):
administration passed legislation to move America away from those fuels
and towards cleaner sources of energy production and consumption, President
Trump made it clear he has different priorities.
Speaker 3 (01:39):
As you've heard me say many times, we have more
liquid gold under our feet than any nation on Earth
and by far, and now I fully authorized the most
talented team ever assembled to go and get it. It's
called Drill, Baby, Drill.
Speaker 1 (01:58):
The President has also halted aproved for wind farms and
stopped allowing large solar arrays on public land. So this hour,
we're asking you, what do you want the future of
American energy to look like? Tolliver, what is the phone number?
Speaker 2 (02:12):
It's eight four four four middle, that's eight four four
four six four three three five three, or you can
write to us at Listen to the Middle dot com.
You can also comment on our live stream on YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and.
Speaker 1 (02:23):
Twitch, following us all of them at the same time.
Joining us on the panel this hour former Colorado Governor
Bill Ritter. He's also the founder of the Center for
the New Energy Economy at Colorado State University. Governor, great
to have you on the show.
Speaker 4 (02:36):
Thank you, it's great to be here. I appreciate it. Jeremy,
I should say I left Colorado State University. I'm now
a partner at Freestone Strategies here in Colorado.
Speaker 1 (02:44):
But you will be the founder forever of that center.
Speaker 5 (02:46):
I will be.
Speaker 1 (02:46):
Lynn Granger joins us as well. She's president and CEO
of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association. Lynn, Welcome to
the Middle.
Speaker 6 (02:52):
Thanks Jeremy, thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (02:54):
So before we get to the phones, let's just talk
about where we are right now with our energy Governor.
Last year, your solar and wind generated more electricity in
the US than coal for the first time. Solar and
wind about seventeen percent combined coal fifteen percent natural gas,
though still makes up forty percent of electricity generation nuclear
around nineteen. How do you feel about that mix? Is
(03:16):
that a new energy economy?
Speaker 4 (03:18):
Well, it's certainly a transition from when we established the
term new energy economy. I ran as a candidate and
called it that, And you know, we were looking at
State at the time had like two hundred megawatson wind
on the grid. We're going to be at forty five
percent for just Excel Energy, biggest power producer, biggest provider
(03:39):
of electricity in Colorado. So if you think about kind
of that short timeframe, I think it's really important instead
of looking at this as a static thing in twenty
twenty five, to understand that if I had said we're
going to get to this place to where we are
now with wind and solar together in Colorado, if I'd
said that back in two thousand and eight, there were
(04:00):
not have been very many believers. In fact, the biggest
advocates back then we're asking me if we could get
to twenty five percent renewable by twenty twenty five. They
kind of had a slogan twenty five by twenty five,
and we're way beyond that and actually moving toward that.
We've had administration since mine that have done some pretty
remarkable things. The Police administration put in a fifty percent
(04:22):
reduction in emissions by twenty thirty economy wide. They're going
to rely heavily on the power sector to do that.
So Excel Energy is going to reduce the submissions by
eighty to eighty five percent, and tri State, an independent
power producer for rules, is going to do the same thing.
That's a really important step to understand. That happened in
(04:42):
a pretty short time.
Speaker 1 (04:43):
Lynn. I'm glad you're here because I don't want to
have this conversation in a vacuum. Oil and gas still
make up the vast majority of our energy production in
this country, but they're not renewable. They're harmful to the environment.
We know that. How much should oil and gas do
you think makeup of our energy future?
Speaker 6 (05:00):
I think our energy future is incredibly important, and you're right,
eighty percent in Colorado, nationally and globally still relies on
the use of fossil fuels for energy. I think our
interview g future is absolutely in all of the above
energy mix, But I think the problem is it can't
be in none of the below, and I think that's
a lot of the conversations that we're hearing. It can't
(05:21):
be no natural gas and no oil. I don't think
that's feasible. I don't think that's a reasonable conversation to have,
even with the goals that we have set, and so
I think we really need to focus on rational conversations
about what is reasonable and what is possible for us
to do.
Speaker 1 (05:36):
So on that point, none of the below. Would you
also say that when President Trump says he wants to
stop all new wind development, is that is that the
wrong approach? Which should it be all of the above?
Speaker 6 (05:47):
We absolutely believe it should be all of the above.
A lot of our members are heavily invested in the
renewable space as well. You know, we've got one member
that has the largest solar farm in the nation right
here in Pueblo, Colorado. So I think it's absolutely in
all of the above solution.
Speaker 1 (06:01):
Governor, how much do renewables rely still on subsidies from
the government. I actually will say I have solar power
at home, which was cheaper for me on day one
than sticking with my current electricity bill, but that's in
part thanks to subsidies.
Speaker 4 (06:15):
Well, it's a really interesting question, and I want to
put it in some context. All of our energy policy
has been managed around the tax policies, and a lot
of it around subsidies. When I was governor, the Congress
was looking at taken away the independent drilling costs, which
is a tax credit that oil and gaskets. We in
this state subsidize oil and gas by giving them an
eighty seven and a half percent tax credit against their
(06:37):
advalorm tax. So people like to demonize the subsidies around
wind and solar, there's no doubt they're important, and they
were reflected in the Inflation Reduction Act. We can see
both wind, solar, and then as storage as well all
have subsidies in there. So does carbon capture and sequestration,
(06:57):
So does geothermal, so does advanced nuclear, all all of
these different things, and they're just kind of how we
manage it. So it's much cheaper because of it. But
what happened, and I'll just be quick about this, what
happened is we utilize those tax credits to really create
economies of scale. And because of that, I've seen the
price of wind come down about eighty five percent since
I was governor fifteen years ago. The price of solar
(07:20):
came down about ninety The price of storage came down
as well, about ninety percent. Those are tremendous reductions. Probably
would have happened without initial subsidies. But don't forget we
manage our energy policy with tax subsidies.
Speaker 6 (07:33):
What do you think about the subsidies, Well, so I
think one, I'm the eighty seven point five percent is
our ad of alarm task credit. That really is so
we're not double taxed. Right, A lot of our tax
goes at the state level where production occurs here in
the state. So that's again, so learn we're not double
tax And I think yes, I think subsidies have been
used in the past. They've been used in our industry.
They're used in renewables as well. Again, I think that's
(07:56):
that's part of it, and it's helpful.
Speaker 4 (07:58):
I think there really were some thing is that in
the conversations happening in Congress about the Inflationia Reduction Act,
there's really a focus, I think on the renewable energy
tax credits and the storage tax credit, the electric vehicle
tax credit that those things are likely to be put
on the chopping block. There's some likelihood and that the
other tax credits where we manage our energy policy are not.
Speaker 5 (08:19):
And so the industry said to.
Speaker 4 (08:21):
Me a long time ago, and I really listened to
him that, you know, we don't want to pick winners
and losers. The United States Congress is doing that right
now as they read across the changes in the Inflation
Reduction Act.
Speaker 1 (08:32):
Let's get a call in and Eric is in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Eric,
welcome to the middle. What do you think the US
energy future should be?
Speaker 7 (08:42):
Yes, I'd just like to say I think it should
be drill, baby, drill. I think it should be fossil
fuels because for a couple of reasons. First thing is
that China and India they're using fossil fuels, and we
are in a manufacturing fight. If you will UH to
bring manufacturing back to the US, then we need to
(09:04):
have a reliable grid, especially with the Trump techs UH tariffs.
If companies do start to come back to the US,
then we need to have a grid that can support
UH factories. Additional UH factories and fossil fuels are going
to be the way to go, whether it's natural gas
(09:26):
or oil or coal.
Speaker 8 (09:28):
And that.
Speaker 1 (09:30):
Be a part of that of that grid.
Speaker 7 (09:32):
Eric, I think in some some States. But you know
Germany a few years ago they tried to switch over
and they had some very big problems with their industrials.
Uh that in their industrial plants, some of them were
shutting down, they didn't have enough fuel. And and so
I think we need to learn from from from from
(09:53):
their error and not try to duplicate it here.
Speaker 1 (09:57):
Eric, thank you for that call. Lyn Granger. He brings
up China, and I just want to ask for your
response to that. But also the fact is that China
is spending way more on clean energy technology as well,
and may end up being the exporter of that because
they're putting so much into the research on that front.
Speaker 6 (10:13):
Yeah, so I think he brings up a good point,
and I would just point out, you know, our world
is using more coal in the last few years than
we have in the history of our world, and that's
because China, places like China, and you're bringing on more
coal plants. So I think as we look to, you know,
invest in renewables, I think it's important to remember that
we can't solve climate change from Colorado or the US.
(10:36):
It's it is a global problem that we need to address,
and I think we shouldn't hurt our state, our country,
our economy in the process of that.
Speaker 4 (10:45):
What would you say, briefly, Governor, just that Carlisle is
this international group that you know, is anment group that
looks at this. They just said, they just released a
Reportant said, China did not is not made the big
push on electric vehicles or clean energy because of the
paris of courts, which is climate right. They did it
because of the business case and for energy security. So
(11:07):
we can talk about climate and talk about you know,
clean air, but also we have to look at the
health of implications of it, but even more importantly the
energy security implications. And I think there's some real negative
energy security implications to do what Eric is suggesting.
Speaker 1 (11:23):
Tolliver, you know, if you drive across many states in
this country, including Oklahoma and Texas, you will see a
whole lot of wind farms.
Speaker 2 (11:30):
Yeah, and some of that is due to a now
deceased oil tycoon named t Boone Pickens who decided to
go all in on wind back in two thousand and eight.
Speaker 9 (11:38):
America is blissed with one of the best wind corridors
in the world. Using private investment and technology that already exists,
we can supply twenty percent of our electricity needs freeing
us to build a bridge to domestic alternative fuels for
transportation and break the stranglehold. Fore and off, I'm Tea
(11:58):
Boone Pickens. This plan will work, but it needs your help.
Speaker 10 (12:03):
Join me.
Speaker 9 (12:03):
We can take back our energy future.
Speaker 5 (12:07):
Well.
Speaker 1 (12:08):
Unfortunately, Tibun Pickens said he lost two hundred million dollars
in the wind business. Tolliver TiVo, No, that's just as
much as we have lost on our podcast extra so far.
We'll be right back with more of your calls on
the Middle. This is the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson. If
you're just tuning, in the Middle is a national call
in show. We're focused on elevating voices from the middle geographically, politically, philosophically,
(12:31):
or maybe you just want to meet in the middle.
This hour, we're in Denver, Colorado, asking you what do
you want the future of American energy to look like? Tolliver,
what is the number to call in?
Speaker 2 (12:41):
It's eight four four four Middle. That's eight four four
four six four three three five three. You can also
write to us at Listen to the Middle dot com
or on all social media.
Speaker 1 (12:49):
I'm joined by Colorado Oil and Gas Association President Lynn
Granger and former Colorado Governor Bill Ritter. And before we
get back to the phones, Bill Ritter, how likely is
it that the kind of energy we will use in
the future is something that we're not even using yet.
We don't even know what it is yet. I remember
playing SimCity two thousand and we had few fusion power plants.
Those really change the game, but we don't have those yet.
Speaker 4 (13:10):
No, we do have a study center at Colorida State University.
It's a pretty advanced laser fusion center. There are fusion
centers in Washington, the state at Washington. So people will
say fusion is possible, but it's not near term, you know.
And so that's the thing we have to think about
near term and the answer and why I think Lynn
and I probably have some places of agreement on this,
(13:32):
The answer is that it's not a technology that we
know right now. It's going to be some mix of
renewables of storage and then either carbon capture and sequestration
for natural gas or even coal or nuclear, some advanced nuclear.
But that's not near term either. And so if we're
(13:54):
really concerned about what we're going to do about CO
two in the air and what we're going to do
about greenhouse gases. There's not a present day technology that
is going to happen without either nuclear carbon caption sequestration geothermal.
Speaker 6 (14:10):
Do you agree with that, Lynn, I absolutely agree with that.
And actually I spent a lot of time in the
Midwest where they're trying to get a very large CCS
project underway, and I think it's it's really tough. I
think there's not a lot of support for it on
either side of the Aisle. I think while I was there,
I think the Democrats really looked at it as you know,
a continuance on the on the use of fossil fuels,
and Republicans really looked at technology like that as kind
(14:33):
of part of this green New Deal that they didn't
really want to be a part of. And so we
talked about, you know, the inflatent Redustion Act and a
lot of the credits that were available there for projects
like these, and I just I think there's going to
be a really hard time kind of getting these permitted
and getting them off the ground.
Speaker 1 (14:48):
It, Yeah, go ahead.
Speaker 4 (14:49):
I think getting to net zero by twenty forty or
twenty fifty is this really important goal that could drive
the innovation that gets us there.
Speaker 1 (14:56):
Let's go to Scott, who's in Oberlin, Ohio. Hi, Scott,
come to the middle. Do you think the future of
American energy should be?
Speaker 11 (15:04):
Well, first, I want to say hello, folks. I love
your show, and man, I really dig your music's editor
does a really great job. So look, I've been studying
energy since the sixties, in the seventies. I'm old, I'm sixties.
I'm in my sixties. But I've studied a lot on
(15:26):
it and I've looked. I mean, it's like I've been
to all different kind of energy production facilities and stuff,
looking around and studying them and everything. And I grew
up with nuclear reactors because my dad worked Trenassa here
in Cleveland at the Lewis Centers. So they were designing
reactors to power Moon bases and space stations and Mars bases.
(15:49):
And they were talking about this stuff in the fifties
and the sixties, and they were putting them together and
testing them in the sixties in the early seventies. And
then I became against them after Three Mile Island because
we all got scared about that.
Speaker 1 (16:03):
And you think nuclear should be part of the future now, Oh.
Speaker 11 (16:08):
Well, that's the thing. I was against it, and then
I started working with environmental groups. I actually got paid
by Green Feast to research nuclear power back in ninety one.
And the more I learned over the courses, and this
is before computers, so I had to go to research
libraries and querry and get stuff sent to you. But
(16:28):
the more I read and the more I learned trying
to find the nail where you know, the nuclear industry
lied decades ago, the more I found out that, man,
it's like, maybe we really need to start doing this stuff.
Speaker 1 (16:41):
Yeah, thank you so much for that. Call the Bill Ritter.
I'm sure nuclear is going to come up again because
the last time we did a show that was involving energy,
and we didn't even expect it, a lot of people
called in and said they want nuclear.
Speaker 4 (16:52):
You know, the Colorado legislature passed a bill that puts
nuclear in the category of renewable energy as part of
our Portfolio Standard and our Clean Energy standard. And so
if the Colorado legislator legislature controlled by Democrats did that,
I think it's very likely to be a nation national conversation.
Speaker 5 (17:09):
The problem is we don't know how much it costs.
Speaker 4 (17:11):
The last reactor that we built in America, we built
in Georgia was the cost overruns are substantial. Its rate based,
so the customers are paying for that. Bill Gates is
trying to build a reactor along with the Department of
Energy that uses a sodium cool technology different than conventional reactors,
but we haven't penciled that out and we don't know
(17:33):
when it would be effective, so it's not a near
term solution to reduce in emissions. And then finally, there
are these small modular reactors that have been developed in Idaho,
but they've not been deployed anybody and again not penciled out.
And so people want affordable, reliable, and now clean energy,
and nuclear is two out of the three. Right, it's
(17:54):
reliable and it's clean. But to know yet whether it's
affordable or not, it's too early.
Speaker 1 (17:59):
Well, and of course then there are those moments like
Three Mile Island, and I remember Fukushima in Japan, and
you know, things that can really scare people away from
nuclear power.
Speaker 5 (18:08):
Are opening Three Mile Island again.
Speaker 1 (18:10):
Yet I do know that I think power the data
centers right.
Speaker 5 (18:14):
Power purchase agreement for that.
Speaker 1 (18:15):
Let's go to Richard who's in Buford Wyoming. Richard, Sorry
if I pronounced the name of your town wrong, but
go ahead. What do you think?
Speaker 12 (18:25):
Thanks for taking the call. I really have a question.
You know, the slogan drill, Baby, drill kind of paints
a picture that our government can actually just go and
just start taking oil out of the ground. And if
I'm not mistaken, there's still the private sector out there
that is is getting leases, they're holding on the leases,
(18:47):
they're using some of the leases. And what part of
this process when our presidents uses that slogan is realistic
and what part is still based on the private sector
and those oil companies deciding how much oil they're going
to pull out of the ground.
Speaker 1 (19:08):
Richard, great question, Linn. I'll go to you on that,
and note that you know, last year, even before Trump
came in, I think, was a record production in the
US for oil.
Speaker 6 (19:16):
Yeah, so just a couple of things. I think in
terms of increasing production, there's a couple of things that
can happen. You know, they can open up more federal
lands for production. They can open up more offshore leaf
sales as well, which were you know, largely stalled during
the Biden administration as well. But I to your point,
I think, you know, there's still a very long permit
(19:37):
process that is involved with any sort of production of
oil and natural gas in our country, you know, at
the federal level, at the state level, and at the
local level. And so there's still lots of lots of
red tape, lots of regulations that need to be adhered
to in order to get those permits in order to drill.
Speaker 1 (19:54):
Even if Trump says drill, baby, drill, that doesn't necessarily
mean that that happens right away.
Speaker 6 (19:58):
Correct.
Speaker 1 (19:58):
Absolutely, Let's go to Cordel, who's in Salt Lake City. Cordell,
Welcome to the middle What do you think, Well, I'd like.
Speaker 13 (20:07):
To know what the costs are going to be to
throw away the last sixteen years of researching solar and
wind power as well as recently it's become more positive
here in Utah to use geothermal energy because we have
a large source of geothermal and to fall back onto
(20:29):
coal and to petroleum is kind of a waste of
money because at the same time, the oil companies are
not going to produce more gas wells because they already
have a bunch that are cemented from this nineteen seventies
and eighties and nineties that they drilled back then and
they've been holding onto because of the for the cost
(20:53):
of oil to go up and up and up, and
the more you produce, the oil goes down.
Speaker 11 (20:58):
Correct.
Speaker 13 (20:59):
So that's a waste of time, Okay to produce coal,
and to produce coal, you've got to dig it out
of the ground. And you know, we we might think
we have the facilities to do it, but we don't.
And nuclear is a good option. But here in Utah
we have one of the biggest dumping grounds for nuclear
(21:20):
waste right that there is in the US.
Speaker 1 (21:23):
So, Cordell, I'm gonna I'm gonna take one of the
points that you made there to the governor, which is
he's saying that it would be it's a it would
be a waste to throw away all this research into
solar and wind. That probably that because Trump doesn't want
to focus on that now, and maybe they start pulling
back on some of the things in the Inflation Reduction
Act that provided subsidies and credits for going into these
cleaner energy fuels. Is that a waste of money, then no, it's.
Speaker 4 (21:47):
Not a waste of money. I think that we've advanced
the technology and solar probably bigger advancements in storage. We
have big advancements in wind and wind energy, and like
I said, the costs have come down tremendously. Taking away
that tax credits may sort of delay the deployment of
those things, but it's not a waste. We have the
(22:08):
best research facility for renewable energy in the world here
in Golden Colorado, the National Renewal Energy Laboratory. They're not
going to quit working on this. I don't believe.
Speaker 1 (22:18):
I just got a text message from Tolliver that said,
we have one million comments online.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
How dare you tell them our secrets? John and Harvard,
Illinois says the path for it should be natural gas,
nuclear build out and geothermal and pumped tydro where appropriate.
That's it I want to I do want to say
that ninety percent of these comments are pro nuclear, So
here's two that aren't. John Ferrill in Minnesota says evidence
suggests that renewable energy and energy storage is going to
(22:43):
be far less expensive than building new gas fired power plants.
If we want affordable, abundant energy, then clean energy is
our best hope. See research from our m I in Colorado.
And then Tie has a fiery one. Tie in Idaho says,
where's the voice that questions the assumption that evermore energy
is needed? What is it going towards? How much does
it take to power the AI engines?
Speaker 5 (23:04):
For example?
Speaker 2 (23:05):
The assumption that the economy and its attendant energy production
must ever grow seems to me like madness.
Speaker 1 (23:11):
What do you think about that, lend Granger?
Speaker 6 (23:13):
Well, so I want to offer some context for that,
because as we talk about our energy future and there
is going to be a demand for you know, more AI.
I think people are playing around with chat GPT and
they're using it at work and they're using it at home.
That's going to call for a lot more data centers.
And just to put some context around the energy use
for AI AI, if you query chat GPT for something
(23:35):
that uses four times more energy than sending an email,
ten times more energy than doing a Google search, and
if you move over to images and video, twenty seven
more times energy to have AI create an image and
two hundred and forty five times more energy for a video.
So I do think as we you know, start using
this technology more, our energy is going our energy need
(23:56):
is going to increase substantially.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
Yeah, Puyah is calling from Atlanta. Georgia. Welcome to the
middle What do you think the energy future should be?
Speaker 14 (24:07):
Hi there, Thanks for having me. I think the energy
future has to go back to a renewed emphasis on education.
We are no longer the education and research leaders of
the world. Just the other day, China is launching a
solar array in space. Other countries are looking at micro nuclear.
We need to make sure that we're thinking on one
(24:29):
hundred and twenty five year timeline as well as the
next quarter timeline, and all of that comes back to education.
We have to make sure that people at are funding
research and not lobbying against innovation at all levels. Right
here in Georgia, Lyn just brought up data centers. We
(24:50):
reduced our building's energy usage by thirty three percent last
year and our rates. Yeah, we need a cross the
board to dedicate ourselves to research and stop living in
an idiocracy.
Speaker 1 (25:05):
Yeah, thank you so much for that, Bill Ritter. What
do you think about that in education as part of this, well.
Speaker 4 (25:11):
I think if you by education mean research, I absolutely agree.
If you think about nineteen seventy three and what it
took to refrigerate you know, food, we've reduced the energy
usage ninety some percent with today's appliances, and we did
that because of research. We did that because people studied that,
(25:32):
and that was a big, big gain. We'd be such
a much bigger energy user if we had not done that.
So we need to continue to do that. But at
the same time, I think we have to We can't
get in a box where say we're going to solve
this only through education, where we need to have I
think conversations in the middle.
Speaker 5 (25:50):
And that's not just a plug to you.
Speaker 4 (25:52):
I really believe we need to have cross party conversations
about the ways we should power the future that get
us to a place of net zero by twenty forty
or twenty fifty.
Speaker 5 (26:02):
That's what's important.
Speaker 4 (26:03):
And then to listen to the business case for that
and the national security case for that, all of those
things are important.
Speaker 5 (26:09):
Well.
Speaker 1 (26:09):
And you know that gets me to something that we
were thinking about as we were getting ready for this show,
which is it is kind of interesting that in this
country on this issue, in Washington anyway, Republicans tend to
be for oil and gas and Democrats tend to be
for renewables in Congress, but when you actually hear from
people around the country, it doesn't break down like that.
(26:32):
You could have somebody who we heard just there from
somebody in Baton Rouge. I don't know what his politics are,
but he believes that oil is a big part of
our future. I mean, it doesn't break down along those
party lines. It's interesting that's become so part is of
an issue. Blyn Granger.
Speaker 6 (26:46):
Absolutely, I agree, and we think it should not be
a part ofant issue because at the end of the day,
all of us, we all use energy. It powers our lives,
it powers our world. We all use it. So we
just have to come together and we need to problem
solve together to address the risks of the climate change.
And I think our industry definitely has stepped up and
is problem solving. I mean in Colorado alone, we've quadruped
(27:08):
all production while simultaneously reducing our emissions by fifty percent.
That's problem solving. That is, you know, coming to the
table and understanding an issue and saying rolling up the
sleeves and saying what can we do to be part
of the solution here.
Speaker 4 (27:20):
And I would just say I had the advantage of
having work done this as governor in two thousand and seven,
where it was bipartisan, we had by partisan sponsorship for
a variety of really important clean energy bills. Over time,
that by partisan spirit has waned somewhat of the states,
but there is still some of that at the state.
It's almost absent at the federal level. And I think
(27:41):
that's the biggest problem.
Speaker 1 (27:44):
Sneak In a call here from Mansfield, Connecticut, Diane is
with us, Diane, what do you think that country's energy
future should be.
Speaker 15 (27:51):
I'm concerned that wind and solar are not constant, and
I believe in drill, baby, drill of geo thermal forty
degree under the ground and deep in water is constant
when it's zero degrees outside or eighty degrees outside. You're
starting with that forty degree constant temperature. Pain and I
(28:12):
put a system, a geothermal system in the late nineteen eighties, and.
Speaker 1 (28:17):
It's working well for you.
Speaker 7 (28:19):
It is thank you for that.
Speaker 1 (28:23):
She brings up the fact that wind and solar, Governor
Ritter are not always there for you, and in fact
that that is an issue that you know, especially for
these data centers, you can't run them at night if
there's no sun.
Speaker 4 (28:35):
That's a fair point that there are intermittent sources we
call it, and storage can really do a lot to
firm the power. That's the word that we use to
say when it's less intermittent, it's firmed. But I don't
disagree to all that geothermal is a firm source of power.
Into the extent there's a resource there that you can
find and get to, you know, turbines in an.
Speaker 5 (28:57):
Affordable way, that it really can be part of a lution.
Speaker 4 (29:00):
But again it's so important to understand it's not the
only solution, because there are places where there is no geothermal,
there are places where there's not enough wind or not
enough good sunlight. And so to think about sort of
this as how do you do this and get to
zero net zero by twenty four twenty fifty, you really
have to have sort of a broad mindset and not
just as an article of faith eliminate some things because
(29:22):
that doesn't rain all the or the sun doesn't shine
all the time, but the wind doesn't pull all the time, right, Well, Tolliver.
Speaker 1 (29:29):
Another energy source that could play into the future of
American energy, and we've heard a lot about it this hour,
is nuclear power. But as we said, many Americans are
kind of uneasy about it.
Speaker 2 (29:41):
If it's good enough for Homer Simpson it's good enough
for me, okay.
Speaker 5 (29:45):
So yeah.
Speaker 2 (29:46):
The three Mile Island accident in Pennsylvania back in nineteen
seventy nine actually didn't do much to help that perception.
Here's Walter Kronkite reporting on the incident on CBS.
Speaker 8 (29:54):
Probably the worst nuclear reactor accident to date. There was
no apparent serious can domination of workers, but a nuclear
safety group said that radiation inside the plant is at
eight times the deadly level, so strong that after passing
through a three foot thick concrete wall, it can be
measured a mile away.
Speaker 1 (30:14):
And as we said, there's now a plan to restore
through Mile Island to power Microsoft's data centers so that
you can make all those you know, AI videos and
pictures that you want.
Speaker 5 (30:26):
Tolliver and I do it too much. I'm in trouble.
They're going to be right.
Speaker 1 (30:30):
Back with more of the middle. This is the Middle.
I'm Jeremy Hobson. In this hour, we're broadcasting from Denver
and asking you what do you want the future of
American energy to look like? You can call us at
eight four four four Middle. That's eight four four four
six four three three five three. You can also reach
out to us at listen to the middle dot com.
My guests are former Colorado Governor Bill Ritter and Colorado
(30:50):
Oil and Gas Association President Lynd Granger. And before we
go back to the phones, Lynd Granger, how has President
Trump's embrace of oil drilling chain aims the landscape for
organizations like yours, which on your own website talk about
things like reducing emissions and climate change. Is it different
to have a president come in with this very direct
(31:11):
proposal to drill, baby drill.
Speaker 6 (31:14):
So really, the landscape in Colorado hasn't changed very much
at all. You know, we have been a leader. We've
gone through forty rulemakings over the last five years due
to some legislation that has really changed the landscape of
how we're regulated here in the state. So really, at
the state and local level here, it's really not changed
much at all.
Speaker 1 (31:32):
And what do you think about nationally right now?
Speaker 6 (31:36):
So I think it's early and we'll see what happens.
I think things will change. I mentioned earlier, there's a couple,
you know, scenarios where we see federal lands being opened
up or off sale leases being opened up as well,
And so I think there's definitely an opportunity to see
increased production here in the United States, but I don't again,
don't think that will have an impact here in Colorado.
Speaker 1 (31:58):
Michael is calling from Meeker COLLEGEO. Hi, Michael, Welcome to
the middle What do you think the future of American
energy should be?
Speaker 16 (32:06):
Well, I think we should stop being so hideously wasteful
and inefficient with it. To start with, we have tens
of thousands of private homes, small business buildings, and other
buildings that are uninsulated and leaky, and it just sucks
up energy and goes to waste. So we need to
start there. And then there's there's talk about nuclear and
(32:28):
everybody thinks of the old reactors we've been building since
the fifties, which are basically based on a reactor design
developed for the United States Navies nuclear ships. They're pressurized
water reactors. So there's better designs out there. The Atomic
Energy Commission was working on in the fifties at oak Ridge,
(32:50):
and him and Rickover, the father of the Nuclear Navy,
and his allies had him shut it down. But it
wasn't a pressurized water reactor, and it can't explode, and
it can't melt down because it's already liquid and it
has the potential to consume ninety percent of the fissile fuels,
unlike reactors today which only consume ten to fifteen, maybe
(33:14):
twenty percent of the energy stored in the fuel rods.
So we need to just make big changes. You could
be more efficient with your buildings.
Speaker 1 (33:24):
Agree be less wasteful, is your point there, Governor Ritter?
What about that? And I should mention that we also
lose a lot of energy in our transmission lines these days,
they're not as good as they could.
Speaker 4 (33:36):
I just want to say, I campaign in Colorado. I
used to run into people like your color all the time,
wickedly smart people to just swat up. In Colorado, they
really challenged you in town hall meetings. But thanks for
your comments. So the built environment, we could do so
much just by addressing inefficiencies in the built environment. He's
exactly right. And like you said, transmission lines, there's a
(33:56):
lot Remember our color who was talking about winds or
being intermittent, stverage not being able to firm it up completely.
We could improve our transmission lines in this country and
move power around so that we could do a far
better job using renewables in places where you know you
don't necessarily have the wind blowing, but the transmission, because
it's sufficient, can get it there.
Speaker 5 (34:18):
Those are the kinds of things.
Speaker 4 (34:19):
That really advanced energy policy would take into consideration to
understand the wisdom of doing that.
Speaker 1 (34:26):
Nate is in Milwaukee. Nate, welcome to the middle. Go ahead.
Speaker 17 (34:31):
Hi, thank you very much for having my call. I
was just going to mention a couple of things. First,
I've got a neighbor in my neighborhood who put I
definitely think renewables should be part of our future. My
neighbor puts solar panels on his roof and his energy
bill dropped by over half sometimes two thirds, depending on
(34:53):
the months, and he's just sorry he didn't put more
up there. Also, if we're going to have a discussion
about what energy we have, we really have to address
and then not follow the dishonesty that was put out
by the oil company and some of their political oil
(35:14):
companies and political allies about renewable energy. An example is
down the Texas governor when they had that cold snap
a few years ago, tried to blame windmills when actually
it was natural gas selves and boilers that were freezing
and the windmills worked better. And I mean here in
Wisconsin we get colder than Texas did and our windmills
(35:37):
worked fine.
Speaker 1 (35:38):
So a couple of issues there. But let me take
that to Lynn Granger just I'm sure that there are
many listeners who feel the same way that they feel
like the oil and gas companies have a stake and
they don't want people to move into renewables. How would
you respond to a question like that?
Speaker 6 (35:55):
Again, I would say that a lot of our member
companies are strong investors in the renewable space. I think
our industry is full of a lot of people that
are focused on technology, focused on innovation and looking again
at all of all of the solutions to power our
energy future.
Speaker 1 (36:12):
Let's go to another call and Eric is in Oakland Township, Michigan.
Speaker 5 (36:18):
Hi.
Speaker 1 (36:18):
Eric, welcome to the middle Go ahead.
Speaker 16 (36:21):
Hi.
Speaker 18 (36:21):
I just wanted to ask a quick question for y'all.
I read a few papers recently talking about how we've
improved in carbon capture technology and these you know, new
carbon capture methods we can employ on fossil fuel plants,
and I was just wondering if you think that it's
even worth investing in making fossil fuels, you know, cleaner
(36:44):
and safer, or if we should just put that time,
money and manpower into renewables research and try and get
renewables you know, across the board, you know, into full
swing faster.
Speaker 1 (36:59):
Great question. I want to hear from both of you
on this. Lynn, let's start with you.
Speaker 6 (37:04):
So absolutely it's worth the investment. I mean, we are
trying to be cleaner, safer, better all of the time.
And as we started the show off, we're still reliable
eighty percent for our energy use on natural gas, oil
and coal around the world, and so I think that
will continue to be the case for the next several
decades at least. So I think we absolutely are investing
(37:25):
every day in reducing our emissions focused on public health
and public safety, and we will absolutely continue to invest
in that.
Speaker 1 (37:33):
What do you think, Governor about carbon capture technology and
whether it will, whether it will it's worth, as he says,
going that route instead of just moving into more renewable fuels.
Speaker 4 (37:43):
So I agree with Lynn with a caveat, and the
caveat's this, we've built a lot of polluting facilities next
to marginalized.
Speaker 5 (37:50):
Communities in this country.
Speaker 4 (37:51):
There's a term called environmental justice, and it could be
something that people just react to in a negative way.
But we if we keep in place polluting facilities and
capture that carbon, we have to ensure that we're also
making sure that marginalized communities, poor communities who have borne
the brunt of some of the pollution from those facilities
(38:12):
are really taking care of. It's why I like the
Inflation Reduction Act. It's why I thought the Justice forty
from the President Biden was the right thing to do,
because it looked at things like carbon capture sequestrations said
let's still let's increase the tax credit for that the
Inflation Reduction Act, but by the way, we're going to
pay attention to the things we've done in marginalized communities
(38:32):
that negatively impacted them. So yes, with that caveat.
Speaker 1 (38:36):
Are you worried that President Trump right now will just
stop enforcing the Inflation Reduction Act, not even go through Congress,
but just not have it go into effect in the
way that he seems to be doing with some other issues.
Speaker 4 (38:48):
No, I'm worried that the congress isla will do it itself.
And environmental Justice group in the Department of Energy has
been taken down. I think the same thing has happened
in another federal agency. And so I'm worried that twofold
the tax guys go away, But so does the focus
on the impact we've had on marginalized communities in this
(39:10):
country from polluting resources.
Speaker 1 (39:12):
Tolliver, I know some more comments are coming in or
our listeners still going nuclear on you.
Speaker 2 (39:16):
Oh my god, I really can't keep up. I'm gonna
start with Brendan and Denver. The oil industry has known
since the nineteen sixties at the burning of fossil fuels
has been the cause of the impending destruction of our planet.
It is urgent to sue the fossil fuel industry into oblivion.
The insatiable greed and the cast of accomplices i e.
The politicians is grotesque. And then this is a cheery
(39:38):
when Jeff and Minnesota says, I think the government should
dedicate whatever it takes to make a fusion a reality,
something like we went all out on going to the
moon in the nineteen sixties.
Speaker 5 (39:49):
We can do it with.
Speaker 2 (39:51):
Several exclamation points.
Speaker 5 (39:53):
We'll end on a happy one.
Speaker 1 (39:55):
Alex is calling from Columbia, South Carolina. Hi, Alex, Welcome
to the middle.
Speaker 19 (39:59):
Go ahead, how you doing I think that we should
start start considering what we do with our energy, you know, well,
you know, our daily habits. Instead of relying on the
government to make decisions for us. I think we should
pioneer through you know, comprehensive radio promotions of turning lights
(40:22):
off like we did in the eighties again, because you know,
today when you go through a house, all the lights
are on. The eighties, we weren't like that. We were
very conscientious of turning lights off, where we drive, how
far we drive using mass transit. And I also think
that we should you know, the EV. The EV is
(40:43):
a wonderful solution to fossil fuels and burning and ethanol production,
of course, but you know, the Bechdel, the Bechtel Corporation,
which is the engineer of the hydro electric dam, the
Hoover Dam, also has a what a micro reactor very
similar to what the gentleman said before concerning our silent
(41:04):
service microreactor, very small nuclear reactors that drive a ge turbine.
They're very small. They're much smaller than the conventional UH
boiling water reactors, their p w rs.
Speaker 5 (41:21):
SOKA.
Speaker 19 (41:21):
I really, you know, I really think we have to
seize as Americans and as as futurists. The notion that
you know, do I really need to spend this kill
a loat? Do I really need to go to the
store and become more efficient and economical in the decisions
(41:42):
that we make and much more conscientious of the notion
that you know, I, as a human, I'm at any
given time needing five hundred British thermal units.
Speaker 1 (41:57):
You know, I have a stop you there, because I
do want to get to that point. I do turn
off the TV when I leave the room because I
know those take up a lot of energy.
Speaker 10 (42:06):
I do not.
Speaker 1 (42:09):
What do you think of Bill Ritterer about that point
that we that we've gotten to the point where we
don't spend as much time maybe thinking about the energy
that we're using.
Speaker 4 (42:16):
Well, I think that's exactly right, but it's only part
of it. Again, but it is personal behavior can make
some difference in our ability to reduce our energy consumption.
We are very much a consumer society, so thinking about
how we consume is absolutely one thing that we can do,
and one right thing that we can do. So I
(42:38):
agree with him. What do you think?
Speaker 2 (42:41):
Oh yeah, I say, is this is why I don't drive?
It's not because I can't.
Speaker 1 (42:45):
I know it is interesting its only public transit and
ubers Lynn Granger, what do you think about that imp energy?
Speaker 6 (42:54):
I think we shouldn't be wasteful at all. I think
as Americans were pretty spoiled, and I think that's because
we're very for to have the natural resources that we have,
and we have affordable, reliable energy, and so we don't
really have to think about if I flip the switch,
is it going to come on? It will come on.
It's very reliable. And I just wanted to make one point.
I think he brought up kind of evs and being
an alternative. I just want to be very clear and
(43:15):
kind of going back to the education piece of this.
You know, electric vehicles are great. Sixty percent of those
cars are made from petroleum byproducts, and they still run
right now on either coal or natural gas when you
plug them into charge. And so I think people really
think that, you know, because you have an EV, you're
not reliant on fossil fuels anymore for your vehicle or
for your transportation, and that just isn't the case.
Speaker 4 (43:36):
But if you're an Excel customer, fifty percent of that
resource when you plug in an EV is going to
be from a renewable power, and so it winds up
penciling out to a good investment in terms of reducing
your carbon footprint.
Speaker 1 (43:52):
Let's get to another call. Annie is in Barrington, Rhode Island. Hi, Annie,
what do you think the energy future should be? Or
what are your thoughts?
Speaker 16 (44:01):
Hi?
Speaker 20 (44:02):
I have a new thought just from talking of hearing
what you just said, which is we should have our
energy meters up front where we can see them. I
have no idea how much I'm spending on my energy
each month until I see my bill. But if I
saw that meter going round and around, because it's right
in my kitchen, I would pay attention. The other thing
is that I worked for university for a long time,
(44:23):
and I love the idea of a national competition, maybe
between the states and sponsored by the government and scientists,
to say, come together, as communities, how are you going
to reduce the amount of energy that your community uses
over the next ten years? And to challenge high schools
and colleges and people to talk, because then you have
(44:44):
to talk with each other, even if you have different
you're coming from different points of view.
Speaker 11 (44:48):
Americans love a.
Speaker 20 (44:49):
Competition, and it would also engender some really interesting ideas,
because that's how even though we're cutting away a lot
of science funding right now. But I would love to
see it nationally.
Speaker 1 (45:01):
A competition underhanding happening. Annie would what would your submission
and the competition be?
Speaker 20 (45:08):
Oh boy, my submission would be I for new stuff.
Mine would be a combination. I don't like nuclear particularly,
I'm afraid of it, but I think if we're going
to get to improve things, I think it probably has
to be a little bit of that. My parents have
a geothermal system.
Speaker 13 (45:28):
I like that.
Speaker 20 (45:29):
I love conserving. I think that can take us a
long way, and recycling renewables and children love this stuff.
Speaker 1 (45:38):
Yes, well, thank you much, and thank you for that
lovely question or lovely point that you made there. I'm
gonna I know, I'm going to regret this, but I'm
going to sneak in one more really fast call from
Rachel and Weathersford, Connecticut. Rachel, you just have thirty seconds,
go ahead.
Speaker 10 (45:54):
Yes, I need some scientific assurance that was digging for
cold drooling for oil, mining for minerals, that we're just
not going to, you know, sink into the middle.
Speaker 1 (46:08):
That we're not going to fall into the earth. Because
we're pulling so much out, Lynn Granger, Should we be worried?
Speaker 6 (46:14):
I don't think so. I don't think we need to
be worried about that.
Speaker 16 (46:18):
You know.
Speaker 6 (46:18):
I think we've been, you know, drilling for oil at
least for the last hundred years, and we haven't fallen
in yet. So I think, you know, technology isn't proving
and I don't think we need to worry about that.
Speaker 1 (46:29):
Before we wrap up this hour and what great calls.
Bill Ridder, You were the governor of Colorado from twenty
seven to twenty eleven. Of all of the areas you
could have focused on following being governor, you chose energy.
Speaker 4 (46:43):
Why is that because we looked at it as a
way to pivot the state. We were very much a
purely fossil fuel state, and I think I was blessed
with a team of people who surrounded me, who kind
of looked around the corner and said, this isn't a
forever existence for the United States, for the globe, and
quite frankly not for Colorado. And so we began to
(47:06):
really think about these other alternatives to being purely a
fossil fuel state, and along the way found that through
policy you could utilize these levers that really made a
difference with respect to these renewable industries and economies of scale,
Meaning if you build it out pretty big, you can
bring prices down, it can become affordable, it can become
(47:29):
the kind of thing that will over time, maybe not
fully replace all the things that we had back in
two thousand and seven, but it could supplant so much
of it.
Speaker 5 (47:41):
And there was these benefits that.
Speaker 4 (47:42):
Were economic, there were environmental. We could do them in
a very sort of equitable way, and quite frankly, it's
still domestic energy.
Speaker 1 (47:50):
Well, that is a great note to end on. I
want to thank my guest, Colorado Oil and Gas Association
President Lynn Granger. Lynn, thank you so much for coming in.
Thanks for and former Colorado Governor Bill Ritter, who founded
the Center for the New Energy Economy at Colorado State University.
Thanks to you as well.
Speaker 5 (48:07):
Thank you. It's great being here.
Speaker 1 (48:08):
And thanks also to our friends here at Colorado Public
Radio for hosting us Jillian Colesno, Stuart Vanderwelt, and our
fantastic audio engineer Tyler Bender. So next week, Tolliver, we
are going to be switching topics again and diving into
the so called Make America Healthy Again movement in Robert F. Kennedy,
who has made a lot of headlines for being against
(48:29):
you know, vaccines. He's also said America is over medicated.
So we're going to be asking you is America over medicated?
Speaker 2 (48:37):
Is he going to be on the show as always?
You can call in at eight four four four Middle,
that's eight four four four six four three three five three.
You can also reach out at Listen to the Middle
dot com, where you can sign up for our free
weekly newsletter and find the sexiest Middle t shirts available now.
Speaker 1 (48:52):
Talk mid the Middle is brought to you by Longnick Media,
distributed by Illinois Public Media and Orvana Illinois, and produced
by Harrison Patino, Danny Alexander, Sambermest, John barth On, A Cadestillar,
and Brandon Condritz. Our technical director is Jason Kroft. Thanks
to our satellite radio listeners, our podcast audience, and the
more than four hundred and thirty public radio stations that
are making it possible for people across the country to
(49:13):
listen to the Middle, I'm Jeremy Hobson and I will
talk to you next week.
The Middle is supported by Journalism Funding Partners, a nonprofit
organization striving to increase the sustainability of local journalism by
building connections between donors and news organizations. More information on
how you can support The Middle at Listen to Them
Middle dot com. Welcome to the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson
(00:20):
in Denver, Colorado, this week along with our house DJ
Tolliver and Tolliver Fun fact, Denver is consistently at the
top of the list of cities with the most downloads
of The Middle podcast.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
Really, you know what, that doesn't surprise me. I'm not
sure why it doesn't, but it doesn't surprise me. It
also has some of the best neighborhood acronyms out there.
So you got rhino, you got logo that's a tough one,
and lo high.
Speaker 1 (00:44):
It's and you don't have Soda Sopa, which was South
Park's fake south of downtown south So I've already got
I haven't even introduced our guests, and they're already laughing
at my jokes. So Colorado is actually the perfect place
to talk about the future of American energy because it
is both one of the the largest producers of oil
and gas in the country and also a hub for
clean energy production and research that's wind, solar, geothermal. The
(01:08):
state is also home to dozens of climate tech startups
and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. It is worth noting, however,
that coal and natural gas still play a huge role
in generating the state's power, something that is reflected across
the country as well. Eighty three percent of our energy
nationally still comes from fossil fuels, and while the Biden
(01:29):
administration passed legislation to move America away from those fuels
and towards cleaner sources of energy production and consumption, President
Trump made it clear he has different priorities.
Speaker 3 (01:39):
As you've heard me say many times, we have more
liquid gold under our feet than any nation on Earth
and by far, and now I fully authorized the most
talented team ever assembled to go and get it. It's
called Drill, Baby, Drill.
Speaker 1 (01:58):
The President has also halted aproved for wind farms and
stopped allowing large solar arrays on public land. So this hour,
we're asking you, what do you want the future of
American energy to look like? Tolliver, what is the phone number?
Speaker 2 (02:12):
It's eight four four four middle, that's eight four four
four six four three three five three, or you can
write to us at Listen to the Middle dot com.
You can also comment on our live stream on YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and.
Speaker 1 (02:23):
Twitch, following us all of them at the same time.
Joining us on the panel this hour former Colorado Governor
Bill Ritter. He's also the founder of the Center for
the New Energy Economy at Colorado State University. Governor, great
to have you on the show.
Speaker 4 (02:36):
Thank you, it's great to be here. I appreciate it. Jeremy,
I should say I left Colorado State University. I'm now
a partner at Freestone Strategies here in Colorado.
Speaker 1 (02:44):
But you will be the founder forever of that center.
Speaker 5 (02:46):
I will be.
Speaker 1 (02:46):
Lynn Granger joins us as well. She's president and CEO
of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association. Lynn, Welcome to
the Middle.
Speaker 6 (02:52):
Thanks Jeremy, thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (02:54):
So before we get to the phones, let's just talk
about where we are right now with our energy Governor.
Last year, your solar and wind generated more electricity in
the US than coal for the first time. Solar and
wind about seventeen percent combined coal fifteen percent natural gas,
though still makes up forty percent of electricity generation nuclear
around nineteen. How do you feel about that mix? Is
(03:16):
that a new energy economy?
Speaker 4 (03:18):
Well, it's certainly a transition from when we established the
term new energy economy. I ran as a candidate and
called it that, And you know, we were looking at
State at the time had like two hundred megawatson wind
on the grid. We're going to be at forty five
percent for just Excel Energy, biggest power producer, biggest provider
(03:39):
of electricity in Colorado. So if you think about kind
of that short timeframe, I think it's really important instead
of looking at this as a static thing in twenty
twenty five, to understand that if I had said we're
going to get to this place to where we are
now with wind and solar together in Colorado, if I'd
said that back in two thousand and eight, there were
(04:00):
not have been very many believers. In fact, the biggest
advocates back then we're asking me if we could get
to twenty five percent renewable by twenty twenty five. They
kind of had a slogan twenty five by twenty five,
and we're way beyond that and actually moving toward that.
We've had administration since mine that have done some pretty
remarkable things. The Police administration put in a fifty percent
(04:22):
reduction in emissions by twenty thirty economy wide. They're going
to rely heavily on the power sector to do that.
So Excel Energy is going to reduce the submissions by
eighty to eighty five percent, and tri State, an independent
power producer for rules, is going to do the same thing.
That's a really important step to understand. That happened in
(04:42):
a pretty short time.
Speaker 1 (04:43):
Lynn. I'm glad you're here because I don't want to
have this conversation in a vacuum. Oil and gas still
make up the vast majority of our energy production in
this country, but they're not renewable. They're harmful to the environment.
We know that. How much should oil and gas do
you think makeup of our energy future?
Speaker 6 (05:00):
I think our energy future is incredibly important, and you're right,
eighty percent in Colorado, nationally and globally still relies on
the use of fossil fuels for energy. I think our
interview g future is absolutely in all of the above
energy mix, But I think the problem is it can't
be in none of the below, and I think that's
a lot of the conversations that we're hearing. It can't
(05:21):
be no natural gas and no oil. I don't think
that's feasible. I don't think that's a reasonable conversation to have,
even with the goals that we have set, and so
I think we really need to focus on rational conversations
about what is reasonable and what is possible for us
to do.
Speaker 1 (05:36):
So on that point, none of the below. Would you
also say that when President Trump says he wants to
stop all new wind development, is that is that the
wrong approach? Which should it be all of the above?
Speaker 6 (05:47):
We absolutely believe it should be all of the above.
A lot of our members are heavily invested in the
renewable space as well. You know, we've got one member
that has the largest solar farm in the nation right
here in Pueblo, Colorado. So I think it's absolutely in
all of the above solution.
Speaker 1 (06:01):
Governor, how much do renewables rely still on subsidies from
the government. I actually will say I have solar power
at home, which was cheaper for me on day one
than sticking with my current electricity bill, but that's in
part thanks to subsidies.
Speaker 4 (06:15):
Well, it's a really interesting question, and I want to
put it in some context. All of our energy policy
has been managed around the tax policies, and a lot
of it around subsidies. When I was governor, the Congress
was looking at taken away the independent drilling costs, which
is a tax credit that oil and gaskets. We in
this state subsidize oil and gas by giving them an
eighty seven and a half percent tax credit against their
(06:37):
advalorm tax. So people like to demonize the subsidies around
wind and solar, there's no doubt they're important, and they
were reflected in the Inflation Reduction Act. We can see
both wind, solar, and then as storage as well all
have subsidies in there. So does carbon capture and sequestration,
(06:57):
So does geothermal, so does advanced nuclear, all all of
these different things, and they're just kind of how we
manage it. So it's much cheaper because of it. But
what happened, and I'll just be quick about this, what
happened is we utilize those tax credits to really create
economies of scale. And because of that, I've seen the
price of wind come down about eighty five percent since
I was governor fifteen years ago. The price of solar
(07:20):
came down about ninety The price of storage came down
as well, about ninety percent. Those are tremendous reductions. Probably
would have happened without initial subsidies. But don't forget we
manage our energy policy with tax subsidies.
Speaker 6 (07:33):
What do you think about the subsidies, Well, so I
think one, I'm the eighty seven point five percent is
our ad of alarm task credit. That really is so
we're not double taxed. Right, A lot of our tax
goes at the state level where production occurs here in
the state. So that's again, so learn we're not double
tax And I think yes, I think subsidies have been
used in the past. They've been used in our industry.
They're used in renewables as well. Again, I think that's
(07:56):
that's part of it, and it's helpful.
Speaker 4 (07:58):
I think there really were some thing is that in
the conversations happening in Congress about the Inflationia Reduction Act,
there's really a focus, I think on the renewable energy
tax credits and the storage tax credit, the electric vehicle
tax credit that those things are likely to be put
on the chopping block. There's some likelihood and that the
other tax credits where we manage our energy policy are not.
Speaker 5 (08:19):
And so the industry said to.
Speaker 4 (08:21):
Me a long time ago, and I really listened to
him that, you know, we don't want to pick winners
and losers. The United States Congress is doing that right
now as they read across the changes in the Inflation
Reduction Act.
Speaker 1 (08:32):
Let's get a call in and Eric is in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Eric,
welcome to the middle. What do you think the US
energy future should be?
Speaker 7 (08:42):
Yes, I'd just like to say I think it should
be drill, baby, drill. I think it should be fossil
fuels because for a couple of reasons. First thing is
that China and India they're using fossil fuels, and we
are in a manufacturing fight. If you will UH to
bring manufacturing back to the US, then we need to
(09:04):
have a reliable grid, especially with the Trump techs UH tariffs.
If companies do start to come back to the US,
then we need to have a grid that can support
UH factories. Additional UH factories and fossil fuels are going
to be the way to go, whether it's natural gas
(09:26):
or oil or coal.
Speaker 8 (09:28):
And that.
Speaker 1 (09:30):
Be a part of that of that grid.
Speaker 7 (09:32):
Eric, I think in some some States. But you know
Germany a few years ago they tried to switch over
and they had some very big problems with their industrials.
Uh that in their industrial plants, some of them were
shutting down, they didn't have enough fuel. And and so
I think we need to learn from from from from
(09:53):
their error and not try to duplicate it here.
Speaker 1 (09:57):
Eric, thank you for that call. Lyn Granger. He brings
up China, and I just want to ask for your
response to that. But also the fact is that China
is spending way more on clean energy technology as well,
and may end up being the exporter of that because
they're putting so much into the research on that front.
Speaker 6 (10:13):
Yeah, so I think he brings up a good point,
and I would just point out, you know, our world
is using more coal in the last few years than
we have in the history of our world, and that's
because China, places like China, and you're bringing on more
coal plants. So I think as we look to, you know,
invest in renewables, I think it's important to remember that
we can't solve climate change from Colorado or the US.
(10:36):
It's it is a global problem that we need to address,
and I think we shouldn't hurt our state, our country,
our economy in the process of that.
Speaker 4 (10:45):
What would you say, briefly, Governor, just that Carlisle is
this international group that you know, is anment group that
looks at this. They just said, they just released a
Reportant said, China did not is not made the big
push on electric vehicles or clean energy because of the
paris of courts, which is climate right. They did it
because of the business case and for energy security. So
(11:07):
we can talk about climate and talk about you know,
clean air, but also we have to look at the
health of implications of it, but even more importantly the
energy security implications. And I think there's some real negative
energy security implications to do what Eric is suggesting.
Speaker 1 (11:23):
Tolliver, you know, if you drive across many states in
this country, including Oklahoma and Texas, you will see a
whole lot of wind farms.
Speaker 2 (11:30):
Yeah, and some of that is due to a now
deceased oil tycoon named t Boone Pickens who decided to
go all in on wind back in two thousand and eight.
Speaker 9 (11:38):
America is blissed with one of the best wind corridors
in the world. Using private investment and technology that already exists,
we can supply twenty percent of our electricity needs freeing
us to build a bridge to domestic alternative fuels for
transportation and break the stranglehold. Fore and off, I'm Tea
(11:58):
Boone Pickens. This plan will work, but it needs your help.
Speaker 10 (12:03):
Join me.
Speaker 9 (12:03):
We can take back our energy future.
Speaker 5 (12:07):
Well.
Speaker 1 (12:08):
Unfortunately, Tibun Pickens said he lost two hundred million dollars
in the wind business. Tolliver TiVo, No, that's just as
much as we have lost on our podcast extra so far.
We'll be right back with more of your calls on
the Middle. This is the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson. If
you're just tuning, in the Middle is a national call
in show. We're focused on elevating voices from the middle geographically, politically, philosophically,
(12:31):
or maybe you just want to meet in the middle.
This hour, we're in Denver, Colorado, asking you what do
you want the future of American energy to look like? Tolliver,
what is the number to call in?
Speaker 2 (12:41):
It's eight four four four Middle. That's eight four four
four six four three three five three. You can also
write to us at Listen to the Middle dot com
or on all social media.
Speaker 1 (12:49):
I'm joined by Colorado Oil and Gas Association President Lynn
Granger and former Colorado Governor Bill Ritter. And before we
get back to the phones, Bill Ritter, how likely is
it that the kind of energy we will use in
the future is something that we're not even using yet.
We don't even know what it is yet. I remember
playing SimCity two thousand and we had few fusion power plants.
Those really change the game, but we don't have those yet.
Speaker 4 (13:10):
No, we do have a study center at Colorida State University.
It's a pretty advanced laser fusion center. There are fusion
centers in Washington, the state at Washington. So people will
say fusion is possible, but it's not near term, you know.
And so that's the thing we have to think about
near term and the answer and why I think Lynn
and I probably have some places of agreement on this,
(13:32):
The answer is that it's not a technology that we
know right now. It's going to be some mix of
renewables of storage and then either carbon capture and sequestration
for natural gas or even coal or nuclear, some advanced nuclear.
But that's not near term either. And so if we're
(13:54):
really concerned about what we're going to do about CO
two in the air and what we're going to do
about greenhouse gases. There's not a present day technology that
is going to happen without either nuclear carbon caption sequestration geothermal.
Speaker 6 (14:10):
Do you agree with that, Lynn, I absolutely agree with that.
And actually I spent a lot of time in the
Midwest where they're trying to get a very large CCS
project underway, and I think it's it's really tough. I
think there's not a lot of support for it on
either side of the Aisle. I think while I was there,
I think the Democrats really looked at it as you know,
a continuance on the on the use of fossil fuels,
and Republicans really looked at technology like that as kind
(14:33):
of part of this green New Deal that they didn't
really want to be a part of. And so we
talked about, you know, the inflatent Redustion Act and a
lot of the credits that were available there for projects
like these, and I just I think there's going to
be a really hard time kind of getting these permitted
and getting them off the ground.
Speaker 1 (14:48):
It, Yeah, go ahead.
Speaker 4 (14:49):
I think getting to net zero by twenty forty or
twenty fifty is this really important goal that could drive
the innovation that gets us there.
Speaker 1 (14:56):
Let's go to Scott, who's in Oberlin, Ohio. Hi, Scott,
come to the middle. Do you think the future of
American energy should be?
Speaker 11 (15:04):
Well, first, I want to say hello, folks. I love
your show, and man, I really dig your music's editor
does a really great job. So look, I've been studying
energy since the sixties, in the seventies. I'm old, I'm sixties.
I'm in my sixties. But I've studied a lot on
(15:26):
it and I've looked. I mean, it's like I've been
to all different kind of energy production facilities and stuff,
looking around and studying them and everything. And I grew
up with nuclear reactors because my dad worked Trenassa here
in Cleveland at the Lewis Centers. So they were designing
reactors to power Moon bases and space stations and Mars bases.
(15:49):
And they were talking about this stuff in the fifties
and the sixties, and they were putting them together and
testing them in the sixties in the early seventies. And
then I became against them after Three Mile Island because
we all got scared about that.
Speaker 1 (16:03):
And you think nuclear should be part of the future now, Oh.
Speaker 11 (16:08):
Well, that's the thing. I was against it, and then
I started working with environmental groups. I actually got paid
by Green Feast to research nuclear power back in ninety one.
And the more I learned over the courses, and this
is before computers, so I had to go to research
libraries and querry and get stuff sent to you. But
(16:28):
the more I read and the more I learned trying
to find the nail where you know, the nuclear industry
lied decades ago, the more I found out that, man,
it's like, maybe we really need to start doing this stuff.
Speaker 1 (16:41):
Yeah, thank you so much for that. Call the Bill Ritter.
I'm sure nuclear is going to come up again because
the last time we did a show that was involving energy,
and we didn't even expect it, a lot of people
called in and said they want nuclear.
Speaker 4 (16:52):
You know, the Colorado legislature passed a bill that puts
nuclear in the category of renewable energy as part of
our Portfolio Standard and our Clean Energy standard. And so
if the Colorado legislator legislature controlled by Democrats did that,
I think it's very likely to be a nation national conversation.
Speaker 5 (17:09):
The problem is we don't know how much it costs.
Speaker 4 (17:11):
The last reactor that we built in America, we built
in Georgia was the cost overruns are substantial. Its rate based,
so the customers are paying for that. Bill Gates is
trying to build a reactor along with the Department of
Energy that uses a sodium cool technology different than conventional reactors,
but we haven't penciled that out and we don't know
(17:33):
when it would be effective, so it's not a near
term solution to reduce in emissions. And then finally, there
are these small modular reactors that have been developed in Idaho,
but they've not been deployed anybody and again not penciled out.
And so people want affordable, reliable, and now clean energy,
and nuclear is two out of the three. Right, it's
(17:54):
reliable and it's clean. But to know yet whether it's
affordable or not, it's too early.
Speaker 1 (17:59):
Well, and of course then there are those moments like
Three Mile Island, and I remember Fukushima in Japan, and
you know, things that can really scare people away from
nuclear power.
Speaker 5 (18:08):
Are opening Three Mile Island again.
Speaker 1 (18:10):
Yet I do know that I think power the data
centers right.
Speaker 5 (18:14):
Power purchase agreement for that.
Speaker 1 (18:15):
Let's go to Richard who's in Buford Wyoming. Richard, Sorry
if I pronounced the name of your town wrong, but
go ahead. What do you think?
Speaker 12 (18:25):
Thanks for taking the call. I really have a question.
You know, the slogan drill, Baby, drill kind of paints
a picture that our government can actually just go and
just start taking oil out of the ground. And if
I'm not mistaken, there's still the private sector out there
that is is getting leases, they're holding on the leases,
(18:47):
they're using some of the leases. And what part of
this process when our presidents uses that slogan is realistic
and what part is still based on the private sector
and those oil companies deciding how much oil they're going
to pull out of the ground.
Speaker 1 (19:08):
Richard, great question, Linn. I'll go to you on that,
and note that you know, last year, even before Trump
came in, I think, was a record production in the
US for oil.
Speaker 6 (19:16):
Yeah, so just a couple of things. I think in
terms of increasing production, there's a couple of things that
can happen. You know, they can open up more federal
lands for production. They can open up more offshore leaf
sales as well, which were you know, largely stalled during
the Biden administration as well. But I to your point,
I think, you know, there's still a very long permit
(19:37):
process that is involved with any sort of production of
oil and natural gas in our country, you know, at
the federal level, at the state level, and at the
local level. And so there's still lots of lots of
red tape, lots of regulations that need to be adhered
to in order to get those permits in order to drill.
Speaker 1 (19:54):
Even if Trump says drill, baby, drill, that doesn't necessarily
mean that that happens right away.
Speaker 6 (19:58):
Correct.
Speaker 1 (19:58):
Absolutely, Let's go to Cordel, who's in Salt Lake City. Cordell,
Welcome to the middle What do you think, Well, I'd like.
Speaker 13 (20:07):
To know what the costs are going to be to
throw away the last sixteen years of researching solar and
wind power as well as recently it's become more positive
here in Utah to use geothermal energy because we have
a large source of geothermal and to fall back onto
(20:29):
coal and to petroleum is kind of a waste of
money because at the same time, the oil companies are
not going to produce more gas wells because they already
have a bunch that are cemented from this nineteen seventies
and eighties and nineties that they drilled back then and
they've been holding onto because of the for the cost
(20:53):
of oil to go up and up and up, and
the more you produce, the oil goes down.
Speaker 11 (20:58):
Correct.
Speaker 13 (20:59):
So that's a waste of time, Okay to produce coal,
and to produce coal, you've got to dig it out
of the ground. And you know, we we might think
we have the facilities to do it, but we don't.
And nuclear is a good option. But here in Utah
we have one of the biggest dumping grounds for nuclear
(21:20):
waste right that there is in the US.
Speaker 1 (21:23):
So, Cordell, I'm gonna I'm gonna take one of the
points that you made there to the governor, which is
he's saying that it would be it's a it would
be a waste to throw away all this research into
solar and wind. That probably that because Trump doesn't want
to focus on that now, and maybe they start pulling
back on some of the things in the Inflation Reduction
Act that provided subsidies and credits for going into these
cleaner energy fuels. Is that a waste of money, then no, it's.
Speaker 4 (21:47):
Not a waste of money. I think that we've advanced
the technology and solar probably bigger advancements in storage. We
have big advancements in wind and wind energy, and like
I said, the costs have come down tremendously. Taking away
that tax credits may sort of delay the deployment of
those things, but it's not a waste. We have the
(22:08):
best research facility for renewable energy in the world here
in Golden Colorado, the National Renewal Energy Laboratory. They're not
going to quit working on this. I don't believe.
Speaker 1 (22:18):
I just got a text message from Tolliver that said,
we have one million comments online.
Speaker 2 (22:22):
How dare you tell them our secrets? John and Harvard,
Illinois says the path for it should be natural gas,
nuclear build out and geothermal and pumped tydro where appropriate.
That's it I want to I do want to say
that ninety percent of these comments are pro nuclear, So
here's two that aren't. John Ferrill in Minnesota says evidence
suggests that renewable energy and energy storage is going to
(22:43):
be far less expensive than building new gas fired power plants.
If we want affordable, abundant energy, then clean energy is
our best hope. See research from our m I in Colorado.
And then Tie has a fiery one. Tie in Idaho says,
where's the voice that questions the assumption that evermore energy
is needed? What is it going towards? How much does
it take to power the AI engines?
Speaker 5 (23:04):
For example?
Speaker 2 (23:05):
The assumption that the economy and its attendant energy production
must ever grow seems to me like madness.
Speaker 1 (23:11):
What do you think about that, lend Granger?
Speaker 6 (23:13):
Well, so I want to offer some context for that,
because as we talk about our energy future and there
is going to be a demand for you know, more AI.
I think people are playing around with chat GPT and
they're using it at work and they're using it at home.
That's going to call for a lot more data centers.
And just to put some context around the energy use
for AI AI, if you query chat GPT for something
(23:35):
that uses four times more energy than sending an email,
ten times more energy than doing a Google search, and
if you move over to images and video, twenty seven
more times energy to have AI create an image and
two hundred and forty five times more energy for a video.
So I do think as we you know, start using
this technology more, our energy is going our energy need
(23:56):
is going to increase substantially.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
Yeah, Puyah is calling from Atlanta. Georgia. Welcome to the
middle What do you think the energy future should be?
Speaker 14 (24:07):
Hi there, Thanks for having me. I think the energy
future has to go back to a renewed emphasis on education.
We are no longer the education and research leaders of
the world. Just the other day, China is launching a
solar array in space. Other countries are looking at micro nuclear.
We need to make sure that we're thinking on one
(24:29):
hundred and twenty five year timeline as well as the
next quarter timeline, and all of that comes back to education.
We have to make sure that people at are funding
research and not lobbying against innovation at all levels. Right
here in Georgia, Lyn just brought up data centers. We
(24:50):
reduced our building's energy usage by thirty three percent last
year and our rates. Yeah, we need a cross the
board to dedicate ourselves to research and stop living in
an idiocracy.
Speaker 1 (25:05):
Yeah, thank you so much for that, Bill Ritter. What
do you think about that in education as part of this, well.
Speaker 4 (25:11):
I think if you by education mean research, I absolutely agree.
If you think about nineteen seventy three and what it
took to refrigerate you know, food, we've reduced the energy
usage ninety some percent with today's appliances, and we did
that because of research. We did that because people studied that,
(25:32):
and that was a big, big gain. We'd be such
a much bigger energy user if we had not done that.
So we need to continue to do that. But at
the same time, I think we have to We can't
get in a box where say we're going to solve
this only through education, where we need to have I
think conversations in the middle.
Speaker 5 (25:50):
And that's not just a plug to you.
Speaker 4 (25:52):
I really believe we need to have cross party conversations
about the ways we should power the future that get
us to a place of net zero by twenty forty
or twenty fifty.
Speaker 5 (26:02):
That's what's important.
Speaker 4 (26:03):
And then to listen to the business case for that
and the national security case for that, all of those
things are important.
Speaker 5 (26:09):
Well.
Speaker 1 (26:09):
And you know that gets me to something that we
were thinking about as we were getting ready for this show,
which is it is kind of interesting that in this
country on this issue, in Washington anyway, Republicans tend to
be for oil and gas and Democrats tend to be
for renewables in Congress, but when you actually hear from
people around the country, it doesn't break down like that.
(26:32):
You could have somebody who we heard just there from
somebody in Baton Rouge. I don't know what his politics are,
but he believes that oil is a big part of
our future. I mean, it doesn't break down along those
party lines. It's interesting that's become so part is of
an issue. Blyn Granger.
Speaker 6 (26:46):
Absolutely, I agree, and we think it should not be
a part ofant issue because at the end of the day,
all of us, we all use energy. It powers our lives,
it powers our world. We all use it. So we
just have to come together and we need to problem
solve together to address the risks of the climate change.
And I think our industry definitely has stepped up and
is problem solving. I mean in Colorado alone, we've quadruped
(27:08):
all production while simultaneously reducing our emissions by fifty percent.
That's problem solving. That is, you know, coming to the
table and understanding an issue and saying rolling up the
sleeves and saying what can we do to be part
of the solution here.
Speaker 4 (27:20):
And I would just say I had the advantage of
having work done this as governor in two thousand and seven,
where it was bipartisan, we had by partisan sponsorship for
a variety of really important clean energy bills. Over time,
that by partisan spirit has waned somewhat of the states,
but there is still some of that at the state.
It's almost absent at the federal level. And I think
(27:41):
that's the biggest problem.
Speaker 1 (27:44):
Sneak In a call here from Mansfield, Connecticut, Diane is
with us, Diane, what do you think that country's energy
future should be.
Speaker 15 (27:51):
I'm concerned that wind and solar are not constant, and
I believe in drill, baby, drill of geo thermal forty
degree under the ground and deep in water is constant
when it's zero degrees outside or eighty degrees outside. You're
starting with that forty degree constant temperature. Pain and I
(28:12):
put a system, a geothermal system in the late nineteen eighties, and.
Speaker 1 (28:17):
It's working well for you.
Speaker 7 (28:19):
It is thank you for that.
Speaker 1 (28:23):
She brings up the fact that wind and solar, Governor
Ritter are not always there for you, and in fact
that that is an issue that you know, especially for
these data centers, you can't run them at night if
there's no sun.
Speaker 4 (28:35):
That's a fair point that there are intermittent sources we
call it, and storage can really do a lot to
firm the power. That's the word that we use to
say when it's less intermittent, it's firmed. But I don't
disagree to all that geothermal is a firm source of power.
Into the extent there's a resource there that you can
find and get to, you know, turbines in an.
Speaker 5 (28:57):
Affordable way, that it really can be part of a lution.
Speaker 4 (29:00):
But again it's so important to understand it's not the
only solution, because there are places where there is no geothermal,
there are places where there's not enough wind or not
enough good sunlight. And so to think about sort of
this as how do you do this and get to
zero net zero by twenty four twenty fifty, you really
have to have sort of a broad mindset and not
just as an article of faith eliminate some things because
(29:22):
that doesn't rain all the or the sun doesn't shine
all the time, but the wind doesn't pull all the time, right, Well, Tolliver.
Speaker 1 (29:29):
Another energy source that could play into the future of
American energy, and we've heard a lot about it this hour,
is nuclear power. But as we said, many Americans are
kind of uneasy about it.
Speaker 2 (29:41):
If it's good enough for Homer Simpson it's good enough
for me, okay.
Speaker 5 (29:45):
So yeah.
Speaker 2 (29:46):
The three Mile Island accident in Pennsylvania back in nineteen
seventy nine actually didn't do much to help that perception.
Here's Walter Kronkite reporting on the incident on CBS.
Speaker 8 (29:54):
Probably the worst nuclear reactor accident to date. There was
no apparent serious can domination of workers, but a nuclear
safety group said that radiation inside the plant is at
eight times the deadly level, so strong that after passing
through a three foot thick concrete wall, it can be
measured a mile away.
Speaker 1 (30:14):
And as we said, there's now a plan to restore
through Mile Island to power Microsoft's data centers so that
you can make all those you know, AI videos and
pictures that you want.
Speaker 5 (30:26):
Tolliver and I do it too much. I'm in trouble.
They're going to be right.
Speaker 1 (30:30):
Back with more of the middle. This is the Middle.
I'm Jeremy Hobson. In this hour, we're broadcasting from Denver
and asking you what do you want the future of
American energy to look like? You can call us at
eight four four four Middle. That's eight four four four
six four three three five three. You can also reach
out to us at listen to the middle dot com.
My guests are former Colorado Governor Bill Ritter and Colorado
(30:50):
Oil and Gas Association President Lynd Granger. And before we
go back to the phones, Lynd Granger, how has President
Trump's embrace of oil drilling chain aims the landscape for
organizations like yours, which on your own website talk about
things like reducing emissions and climate change. Is it different
to have a president come in with this very direct
(31:11):
proposal to drill, baby drill.
Speaker 6 (31:14):
So really, the landscape in Colorado hasn't changed very much
at all. You know, we have been a leader. We've
gone through forty rulemakings over the last five years due
to some legislation that has really changed the landscape of
how we're regulated here in the state. So really, at
the state and local level here, it's really not changed
much at all.
Speaker 1 (31:32):
And what do you think about nationally right now?
Speaker 6 (31:36):
So I think it's early and we'll see what happens.
I think things will change. I mentioned earlier, there's a couple,
you know, scenarios where we see federal lands being opened
up or off sale leases being opened up as well,
And so I think there's definitely an opportunity to see
increased production here in the United States, but I don't again,
don't think that will have an impact here in Colorado.
Speaker 1 (31:58):
Michael is calling from Meeker COLLEGEO. Hi, Michael, Welcome to
the middle What do you think the future of American
energy should be?
Speaker 16 (32:06):
Well, I think we should stop being so hideously wasteful
and inefficient with it. To start with, we have tens
of thousands of private homes, small business buildings, and other
buildings that are uninsulated and leaky, and it just sucks
up energy and goes to waste. So we need to
start there. And then there's there's talk about nuclear and
(32:28):
everybody thinks of the old reactors we've been building since
the fifties, which are basically based on a reactor design
developed for the United States Navies nuclear ships. They're pressurized
water reactors. So there's better designs out there. The Atomic
Energy Commission was working on in the fifties at oak Ridge,
(32:50):
and him and Rickover, the father of the Nuclear Navy,
and his allies had him shut it down. But it
wasn't a pressurized water reactor, and it can't explode, and
it can't melt down because it's already liquid and it
has the potential to consume ninety percent of the fissile fuels,
unlike reactors today which only consume ten to fifteen, maybe
(33:14):
twenty percent of the energy stored in the fuel rods.
So we need to just make big changes. You could
be more efficient with your buildings.
Speaker 1 (33:24):
Agree be less wasteful, is your point there, Governor Ritter?
What about that? And I should mention that we also
lose a lot of energy in our transmission lines these days,
they're not as good as they could.
Speaker 4 (33:36):
I just want to say, I campaign in Colorado. I
used to run into people like your color all the time,
wickedly smart people to just swat up. In Colorado, they
really challenged you in town hall meetings. But thanks for
your comments. So the built environment, we could do so
much just by addressing inefficiencies in the built environment. He's
exactly right. And like you said, transmission lines, there's a
(33:56):
lot Remember our color who was talking about winds or
being intermittent, stverage not being able to firm it up completely.
We could improve our transmission lines in this country and
move power around so that we could do a far
better job using renewables in places where you know you
don't necessarily have the wind blowing, but the transmission, because
it's sufficient, can get it there.
Speaker 5 (34:18):
Those are the kinds of things.
Speaker 4 (34:19):
That really advanced energy policy would take into consideration to
understand the wisdom of doing that.
Speaker 1 (34:26):
Nate is in Milwaukee. Nate, welcome to the middle. Go ahead.
Speaker 17 (34:31):
Hi, thank you very much for having my call. I
was just going to mention a couple of things. First,
I've got a neighbor in my neighborhood who put I
definitely think renewables should be part of our future. My
neighbor puts solar panels on his roof and his energy
bill dropped by over half sometimes two thirds, depending on
(34:53):
the months, and he's just sorry he didn't put more
up there. Also, if we're going to have a discussion
about what energy we have, we really have to address
and then not follow the dishonesty that was put out
by the oil company and some of their political oil
(35:14):
companies and political allies about renewable energy. An example is
down the Texas governor when they had that cold snap
a few years ago, tried to blame windmills when actually
it was natural gas selves and boilers that were freezing
and the windmills worked better. And I mean here in
Wisconsin we get colder than Texas did and our windmills
(35:37):
worked fine.
Speaker 1 (35:38):
So a couple of issues there. But let me take
that to Lynn Granger just I'm sure that there are
many listeners who feel the same way that they feel
like the oil and gas companies have a stake and
they don't want people to move into renewables. How would
you respond to a question like that?
Speaker 6 (35:55):
Again, I would say that a lot of our member
companies are strong investors in the renewable space. I think
our industry is full of a lot of people that
are focused on technology, focused on innovation and looking again
at all of all of the solutions to power our
energy future.
Speaker 1 (36:12):
Let's go to another call and Eric is in Oakland Township, Michigan.
Speaker 5 (36:18):
Hi.
Speaker 1 (36:18):
Eric, welcome to the middle Go ahead.
Speaker 16 (36:21):
Hi.
Speaker 18 (36:21):
I just wanted to ask a quick question for y'all.
I read a few papers recently talking about how we've
improved in carbon capture technology and these you know, new
carbon capture methods we can employ on fossil fuel plants,
and I was just wondering if you think that it's
even worth investing in making fossil fuels, you know, cleaner
(36:44):
and safer, or if we should just put that time,
money and manpower into renewables research and try and get
renewables you know, across the board, you know, into full
swing faster.
Speaker 1 (36:59):
Great question. I want to hear from both of you
on this. Lynn, let's start with you.
Speaker 6 (37:04):
So absolutely it's worth the investment. I mean, we are
trying to be cleaner, safer, better all of the time.
And as we started the show off, we're still reliable
eighty percent for our energy use on natural gas, oil
and coal around the world, and so I think that
will continue to be the case for the next several
decades at least. So I think we absolutely are investing
(37:25):
every day in reducing our emissions focused on public health
and public safety, and we will absolutely continue to invest
in that.
Speaker 1 (37:33):
What do you think, Governor about carbon capture technology and
whether it will, whether it will it's worth, as he says,
going that route instead of just moving into more renewable fuels.
Speaker 4 (37:43):
So I agree with Lynn with a caveat, and the
caveat's this, we've built a lot of polluting facilities next
to marginalized.
Speaker 5 (37:50):
Communities in this country.
Speaker 4 (37:51):
There's a term called environmental justice, and it could be
something that people just react to in a negative way.
But we if we keep in place polluting facilities and
capture that carbon, we have to ensure that we're also
making sure that marginalized communities, poor communities who have borne
the brunt of some of the pollution from those facilities
(38:12):
are really taking care of. It's why I like the
Inflation Reduction Act. It's why I thought the Justice forty
from the President Biden was the right thing to do,
because it looked at things like carbon capture sequestrations said
let's still let's increase the tax credit for that the
Inflation Reduction Act, but by the way, we're going to
pay attention to the things we've done in marginalized communities
(38:32):
that negatively impacted them. So yes, with that caveat.
Speaker 1 (38:36):
Are you worried that President Trump right now will just
stop enforcing the Inflation Reduction Act, not even go through Congress,
but just not have it go into effect in the
way that he seems to be doing with some other issues.
Speaker 4 (38:48):
No, I'm worried that the congress isla will do it itself.
And environmental Justice group in the Department of Energy has
been taken down. I think the same thing has happened
in another federal agency. And so I'm worried that twofold
the tax guys go away, But so does the focus
on the impact we've had on marginalized communities in this
(39:10):
country from polluting resources.
Speaker 1 (39:12):
Tolliver, I know some more comments are coming in or
our listeners still going nuclear on you.
Speaker 2 (39:16):
Oh my god, I really can't keep up. I'm gonna
start with Brendan and Denver. The oil industry has known
since the nineteen sixties at the burning of fossil fuels
has been the cause of the impending destruction of our planet.
It is urgent to sue the fossil fuel industry into oblivion.
The insatiable greed and the cast of accomplices i e.
The politicians is grotesque. And then this is a cheery
(39:38):
when Jeff and Minnesota says, I think the government should
dedicate whatever it takes to make a fusion a reality,
something like we went all out on going to the
moon in the nineteen sixties.
Speaker 5 (39:49):
We can do it with.
Speaker 2 (39:51):
Several exclamation points.
Speaker 5 (39:53):
We'll end on a happy one.
Speaker 1 (39:55):
Alex is calling from Columbia, South Carolina. Hi, Alex, Welcome
to the middle.
Speaker 19 (39:59):
Go ahead, how you doing I think that we should
start start considering what we do with our energy, you know, well,
you know, our daily habits. Instead of relying on the
government to make decisions for us. I think we should
pioneer through you know, comprehensive radio promotions of turning lights
(40:22):
off like we did in the eighties again, because you know,
today when you go through a house, all the lights
are on. The eighties, we weren't like that. We were
very conscientious of turning lights off, where we drive, how
far we drive using mass transit. And I also think
that we should you know, the EV. The EV is
(40:43):
a wonderful solution to fossil fuels and burning and ethanol production,
of course, but you know, the Bechdel, the Bechtel Corporation,
which is the engineer of the hydro electric dam, the
Hoover Dam, also has a what a micro reactor very
similar to what the gentleman said before concerning our silent
(41:04):
service microreactor, very small nuclear reactors that drive a ge turbine.
They're very small. They're much smaller than the conventional UH
boiling water reactors, their p w rs.
Speaker 5 (41:21):
SOKA.
Speaker 19 (41:21):
I really, you know, I really think we have to
seize as Americans and as as futurists. The notion that
you know, do I really need to spend this kill
a loat? Do I really need to go to the
store and become more efficient and economical in the decisions
(41:42):
that we make and much more conscientious of the notion
that you know, I, as a human, I'm at any
given time needing five hundred British thermal units.
Speaker 1 (41:57):
You know, I have a stop you there, because I
do want to get to that point. I do turn
off the TV when I leave the room because I
know those take up a lot of energy.
Speaker 10 (42:06):
I do not.
Speaker 1 (42:09):
What do you think of Bill Ritterer about that point
that we that we've gotten to the point where we
don't spend as much time maybe thinking about the energy
that we're using.
Speaker 4 (42:16):
Well, I think that's exactly right, but it's only part
of it. Again, but it is personal behavior can make
some difference in our ability to reduce our energy consumption.
We are very much a consumer society, so thinking about
how we consume is absolutely one thing that we can do,
and one right thing that we can do. So I
(42:38):
agree with him. What do you think?
Speaker 2 (42:41):
Oh yeah, I say, is this is why I don't drive?
It's not because I can't.
Speaker 1 (42:45):
I know it is interesting its only public transit and
ubers Lynn Granger, what do you think about that imp energy?
Speaker 6 (42:54):
I think we shouldn't be wasteful at all. I think
as Americans were pretty spoiled, and I think that's because
we're very for to have the natural resources that we have,
and we have affordable, reliable energy, and so we don't
really have to think about if I flip the switch,
is it going to come on? It will come on.
It's very reliable. And I just wanted to make one point.
I think he brought up kind of evs and being
an alternative. I just want to be very clear and
(43:15):
kind of going back to the education piece of this.
You know, electric vehicles are great. Sixty percent of those
cars are made from petroleum byproducts, and they still run
right now on either coal or natural gas when you
plug them into charge. And so I think people really
think that, you know, because you have an EV, you're
not reliant on fossil fuels anymore for your vehicle or
for your transportation, and that just isn't the case.
Speaker 4 (43:36):
But if you're an Excel customer, fifty percent of that
resource when you plug in an EV is going to
be from a renewable power, and so it winds up
penciling out to a good investment in terms of reducing
your carbon footprint.
Speaker 1 (43:52):
Let's get to another call. Annie is in Barrington, Rhode Island. Hi, Annie,
what do you think the energy future should be? Or
what are your thoughts?
Speaker 16 (44:01):
Hi?
Speaker 20 (44:02):
I have a new thought just from talking of hearing
what you just said, which is we should have our
energy meters up front where we can see them. I
have no idea how much I'm spending on my energy
each month until I see my bill. But if I
saw that meter going round and around, because it's right
in my kitchen, I would pay attention. The other thing
is that I worked for university for a long time,
(44:23):
and I love the idea of a national competition, maybe
between the states and sponsored by the government and scientists,
to say, come together, as communities, how are you going
to reduce the amount of energy that your community uses
over the next ten years? And to challenge high schools
and colleges and people to talk, because then you have
(44:44):
to talk with each other, even if you have different
you're coming from different points of view.
Speaker 11 (44:48):
Americans love a.
Speaker 20 (44:49):
Competition, and it would also engender some really interesting ideas,
because that's how even though we're cutting away a lot
of science funding right now. But I would love to
see it nationally.
Speaker 1 (45:01):
A competition underhanding happening. Annie would what would your submission
and the competition be?
Speaker 20 (45:08):
Oh boy, my submission would be I for new stuff.
Mine would be a combination. I don't like nuclear particularly,
I'm afraid of it, but I think if we're going
to get to improve things, I think it probably has
to be a little bit of that. My parents have
a geothermal system.
Speaker 13 (45:28):
I like that.
Speaker 20 (45:29):
I love conserving. I think that can take us a
long way, and recycling renewables and children love this stuff.
Speaker 1 (45:38):
Yes, well, thank you much, and thank you for that
lovely question or lovely point that you made there. I'm
gonna I know, I'm going to regret this, but I'm
going to sneak in one more really fast call from
Rachel and Weathersford, Connecticut. Rachel, you just have thirty seconds,
go ahead.
Speaker 10 (45:54):
Yes, I need some scientific assurance that was digging for
cold drooling for oil, mining for minerals, that we're just
not going to, you know, sink into the middle.
Speaker 1 (46:08):
That we're not going to fall into the earth. Because
we're pulling so much out, Lynn Granger, Should we be worried?
Speaker 6 (46:14):
I don't think so. I don't think we need to
be worried about that.
Speaker 16 (46:18):
You know.
Speaker 6 (46:18):
I think we've been, you know, drilling for oil at
least for the last hundred years, and we haven't fallen
in yet. So I think, you know, technology isn't proving
and I don't think we need to worry about that.
Speaker 1 (46:29):
Before we wrap up this hour and what great calls.
Bill Ridder, You were the governor of Colorado from twenty
seven to twenty eleven. Of all of the areas you
could have focused on following being governor, you chose energy.
Speaker 4 (46:43):
Why is that because we looked at it as a
way to pivot the state. We were very much a
purely fossil fuel state, and I think I was blessed
with a team of people who surrounded me, who kind
of looked around the corner and said, this isn't a
forever existence for the United States, for the globe, and
quite frankly not for Colorado. And so we began to
(47:06):
really think about these other alternatives to being purely a
fossil fuel state, and along the way found that through
policy you could utilize these levers that really made a
difference with respect to these renewable industries and economies of scale,
Meaning if you build it out pretty big, you can
bring prices down, it can become affordable, it can become
(47:29):
the kind of thing that will over time, maybe not
fully replace all the things that we had back in
two thousand and seven, but it could supplant so much
of it.
Speaker 5 (47:41):
And there was these benefits that.
Speaker 4 (47:42):
Were economic, there were environmental. We could do them in
a very sort of equitable way, and quite frankly, it's
still domestic energy.
Speaker 1 (47:50):
Well, that is a great note to end on. I
want to thank my guest, Colorado Oil and Gas Association
President Lynn Granger. Lynn, thank you so much for coming in.
Thanks for and former Colorado Governor Bill Ritter, who founded
the Center for the New Energy Economy at Colorado State University.
Thanks to you as well.
Speaker 5 (48:07):
Thank you. It's great being here.
Speaker 1 (48:08):
And thanks also to our friends here at Colorado Public
Radio for hosting us Jillian Colesno, Stuart Vanderwelt, and our
fantastic audio engineer Tyler Bender. So next week, Tolliver, we
are going to be switching topics again and diving into
the so called Make America Healthy Again movement in Robert F. Kennedy,
who has made a lot of headlines for being against
(48:29):
you know, vaccines. He's also said America is over medicated.
So we're going to be asking you is America over medicated?
Speaker 2 (48:37):
Is he going to be on the show as always?
You can call in at eight four four four Middle,
that's eight four four four six four three three five three.
You can also reach out at Listen to the Middle
dot com, where you can sign up for our free
weekly newsletter and find the sexiest Middle t shirts available now.
Speaker 1 (48:52):
Talk mid the Middle is brought to you by Longnick Media,
distributed by Illinois Public Media and Orvana Illinois, and produced
by Harrison Patino, Danny Alexander, Sambermest, John barth On, A Cadestillar,
and Brandon Condritz. Our technical director is Jason Kroft. Thanks
to our satellite radio listeners, our podcast audience, and the
more than four hundred and thirty public radio stations that
are making it possible for people across the country to
(49:13):
listen to the Middle, I'm Jeremy Hobson and I will
talk to you next week.
Host
Jeremy Hobson
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com