January 16, 2026 • 31 mins
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 (00:08):
Seven, six fifty five KARROSD talk station with a great
Friday lineup on the heels of the FOP President Ken Kober,
callin Out Shenanigan's the Police Department Tech Friday with Dave
Hat Do we get Briga McCowen from the Hudson Institute
in studio fresh off a trip to d C where
he was in fact talking energy policy. I will strongly
encourage you to find his podcast where you get your podcasts.
(00:30):
Charged Conversations. Joe Strecker does that one, doesn't he? He
sure does. A great guy, isn't he He is.
Speaker 2 (00:36):
He's a slave driver as a producer, though, let's be honest,
he's a good producer. He's a great producer that requires,
you know, you heed his warnings and his calls.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
You're going to have to do a retake. So Joe Streker,
producer of podcasts including Charged Conversations. Yeah, Brigha McCown's got
just an unbelievable background and energy policy, which is why
he was in d C and why the Japanese government
assigned you in like an intern or.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
Something they did from the Jackpanese Development Bank.
Speaker 1 (01:01):
That's sort of.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
You know, their government Economic ministry and policy and one,
and they want to know about energy security. So they
sent some folks over for seven weeks to hang out
with us at Hudson and figure it out.
Speaker 1 (01:18):
Energy security by way of what the United States is
going to be doing, by way of pursuing energy production,
oil gas, nukes, whatever it happens to be compared to
the last administration. Of course, in the Obama administration, you know,
your gauge of energy security had to be pretty grim
considering we were not going to invest in anything that
provides reliable electricity. Was all going to be wind bills. Yeah,
(01:41):
and maybe hydro to the extent hasn't been used yet,
solar panels of course, and then unicorns.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
Absolutely, thanks for mentioning unicorns, because that is the magic
mix of things. But you know, in all seriousness, it's
a real topic. And you know Asian countries, but Japan
imports about ninety five percent of the energy that it
needs minus nuclear that it produces. We're so blessed, Brian
to have all these natural resources and to be able
(02:07):
to provide energy fairly, expensively and reliably. That underpins our economy,
our economic security, our national security.
Speaker 1 (02:16):
And so.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
It's something that i've spent many years on and while
I don't agree with everything any administration does, we are
on a much better path than we were.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
We are, and I suppose we should probably just sort
of dive into this whole US power grid concern we've got.
I saw this article yesterday. As a matter of fact,
I had at my stack from American Greatness about Pennsylvania.
They're connecting and get their energy from PJAM Interconnection, which
provides power to basically all of thirteen states, including Pennsylvania District, Columbia,
(02:50):
et cetera. But they released an executive summary and said
that they need a hell of a lot more power
than is even available. And the big problem with this,
and I mentioned it the other day when you talk
about the Democrats scream screaming about affordability, and I mentioned
to you off air my outrageous Duke Bill, all things
(03:11):
being equal, it was a hell of a lot higher.
There's an affordability problem, but it's brought about by our
own stupid rules and regulations. It takes like almost ten
years to get an energy producing project like a natural
gas plant. There's no rocket science involved in that. We've
been doing those for years, but it takes forever to
get it permit you need it. Demonstrably, all these commissions
(03:33):
and all these industry leaders, the people who have electricity demands,
including AI facilities, are screaming out loud about the limited
power delivery. Yeah, but you sorry, We'll wait around because
we have regulations on stacked on regulations. Yeah, we do.
Speaker 2 (03:47):
And that's one of the things that this current administration
through what they're calling the Energy Dominance Council, which really
just means let's get all of the federal agencies together
and figure out how to cut the red tape, figure
out how we can move more quickly. You know, it
used to be that when we wanted to build something,
the permitting the thinking about it would take about two
(04:08):
years and we'd get it on. That has moved to
seven to ten years under successive administrations, and the current
president wants to bring it back to eighteen months. But
a couple things standing in the way. Number one is
the permitting laws themselves need to be changed because people
have figured out how to manipulate the system, and it's
(04:30):
been manipulated not to make it too quick, but to
make it too slow. Because everyone has an opinion about
what they should or should not do well.
Speaker 1 (04:40):
There's a lot of money to be made by fighting
off the building of literally anything there is. There is
all this green money, all this foreign money and influence.
You imagine what the Chinese Communist Party is thinking when
they see us enact legislation that makes it more onerous
and more expensive to produce power. They are laughing their
collective asses off, and in fact, they are pumping out
(05:01):
information that pushes us toward this. CO two is bad
religion that we've all bought hook line and sinker, carbon
dioxide plant food. You can talk about that, but the
idea that these parts per million are a problem. It
just makes it impossible to build efficient energy plants to
produce constant electricity. Period. They love that, Yeah, it really does.
And if you look back, well, well, parenthetically, while they
(05:22):
continue to build multiple coal plants, natural gas plants and
enjoy the benefits of nukew in some degree.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
Yes, and let me talk about the paragrid in just
a second here, But I tell people, well, happy twenty
twenty six. Did you know that in twenty twenty five
the world used more coal than it has in any
year of human history.
Speaker 1 (05:43):
Because we have more people and more people and more
technology is more electricity. Plus, there's a lot of people
on the green side of the equation to think we
need to hook our cars up to the grid, brig them.
I know, right, there's a great idea. Well, and so
you know that grid. And by the way, China I
would give them an a plus and energy security because
they want it all. And people say, well, look they're
(06:05):
producing more solar.
Speaker 2 (06:06):
Well yeah, but we buy them, we buy them, and yes,
they're deploying more of everything because they want as much
energy as they can get because they get it. And
so you know, transmission lines are really the bottleneck of
a two point problem. The first point is we were
forced to retire our own coal fired power plants under
(06:29):
the previous administration.
Speaker 1 (06:30):
Through a throat cutting exercise. The legislation wouldn't have shut
them down, but for the obligation under the law.
Speaker 2 (06:37):
Yes, well, you know, if we need more power, it'll
just magically materialize. Except it hasn't. So right, so we
have a dip in available power as AI data centers
are requiring more and more power cars and if you
want to plug your car into the EV that's more
power too, And that was just supposed to magically sort
itself out. But those same permitting regulations that we need change.
(06:59):
You can't build a power plant either, and then overlay
that with a transmission system that is forty five years
old on average, not designed to handle what we need
it to, not designed to go where people are moving to,
not designed to connect to a power plant that has
(07:19):
yet to be built in a place where there is
no grid. And we have a problem, major problem.
Speaker 1 (07:25):
And you know when you get to states like California
where these decrepit power transmission lines are hanging in dense
forests that haven't been cleared of underbrush, give a massive
potential for wildfires through the well, these power lines dropping.
Speaker 2 (07:39):
And that has happened, has it?
Speaker 1 (07:41):
It has? Indeed, I haven't read anything about that Brigham here,
Yeah it has.
Speaker 2 (07:44):
And by the way, if you're a power company in California,
you are strictly liable for anything that you might cause,
even though the government won't let you upgrade your power
lines and won't let you cut the vegetation.
Speaker 1 (07:54):
Still your fault, right, Or keep the reservoirs filled with water,
life saving water to put fires out, yeah yeah, Or
micromanage the actions of the fire department during major conflictations,
it's a real well. Anyhow to Brigham account, we're going
to continue on this discussion. We've got lots of topics
to go over. Nuclear of course, we will talk about
that energy policy by litigation, on and on and on.
(08:17):
You can find them at Hudson dot org and also
again Charged the Conversations with Brigham account. Find the podcast,
whoever find your podcast, and you'll stay up on these matters.
In between times, he joins the fifty five KRC Morning
Show seven fifteen Right now fifty five KRCD talk station
looking for a world class deep talk station seven nineteen,
fifty five krc DE talk station. Very happy Friday to
(08:39):
you spending an hour here in studio. Brigham account from
Hudson In's too. He's responsible for Charge to Conversations and
aim suggests what he talks about, which is energy policy.
An expert in energy policy, he is even so much
so that they called him up to DC to spend
some time talking with the experts there about where our
economic future, our energy policy future is going, and hope
to God, it's repealing rules, right regulations and impediments to
(09:01):
fixing our grid, to building new reliable power sources. To
meeting the demands of the general American public, not just
for some AI facility, but for all of us. I mean,
Lord almighty, you know what it's like to deal without
your Verizon phone for ten hours? What about if the
lights go out for ten, fifteen, twenty hours because they
can't meet the demands And that has happened before, and
they talk about it more and more brigging.
Speaker 2 (09:22):
They have, and there would be total chaos. Could you
imagine if we went two or three days without electricity?
Speaker 1 (09:27):
Well, we've been through that, and like, oh they're storms,
storms that came through. Yeah, it's a big deal, it is.
Speaker 2 (09:32):
And you know, energy underpins our entire life. We can't
do anything without it. We can't go out to shop,
we can't read, we can't connect bank, buy food, keep
it cold.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
Well, someone had said that the other day was an
article about the power going off and how they were
freezing in their own homes because there hadn't been power
in a few days. And they had just gone to
the grocery store and had their entire fridge filled with
fresh And I said to myself, just put them out outside.
You're not going to have your grocery spoiled. Anyway. But
it is a legitimate problem. People die.
Speaker 2 (10:06):
It is, it is, And you know it's interesting you
raise that point because climate activists will talk about how
climate change is killing people. Yet more people die in
Europe lack of air conditioning than anything else. Throw people
die if they freeze to death. I think you know
the metrics we've been a little bit off on, and
it is extremely important that we have affordable and reliable power.
(10:31):
And you know, I'll tell you aroun a lot of
the upgrades that have to happen, we're gonna have to
rear where that money's going to come from, because you
know those aren't free either.
Speaker 1 (10:40):
No, you should pay for them. No, And it's in
furtherance of your point. I have to recommend my listeners.
And I mentioned this in my earlier comments in the
five o'clock hour. Worth finding. I think you'll find it
on OutKick. I believe that is a website. I found
the article from Ian Miller on zero Head, who was
reposted there headlined twenty years later. And Inconvenient Truth, which
(11:03):
is Al Gore's two thousand and six documentary, and Inconvenient
Truth has been thoroughly debunked, and they walk through all
of his gloom and doom claims and point out that
every single one of them has not come true at all.
In fact, some are The situation now is even better
than it was when al Gore was predicting we were
all gonna die. This is a load of crap, Brigham,
you know it is.
Speaker 2 (11:23):
And I think there are well intentioned people, and look,
we all wanted to dupe.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
They're useful idiots, Brigham. Let's call them what they are. Well,
they listens, got okay, they got misguided. I don't know
if he was making it up as he goes along,
like they did with all these COVID nineteen ten foot rules.
But you know what he said didn't come true. We
get twenty years to look at. And the other point
the article makes it, it's extremely valuable. One. He starts
(11:48):
with carbon dioxide readings in the nineteen fifties. The planet's
four and a half billion years old, and the furthest
back there, the farthest back they can go with like
bor sampling with Arctic ice, it's six hundred and fIF
thousand years, which still represents only a fraction of the
time the globe has been around. You know, we've made
it this far with ebbs and flows the carbon dioxide.
The plants love it, so I think we're gonna be
(12:09):
just fine. Plus it's so slow, this incremental increase of
CO two. Even if you think it's going to have
an impact, we will be able to deal with it
by moving and adjusting as time rolls on.
Speaker 2 (12:21):
We have to do it now, absolutely, you know. And
one of the things I talk about is something called
the energy mix, and that is where do we get
all of our energy from? Right, And just like a
carpenter doesn't use a hammer on everything, I've tried, it
doesn't work. Yeah, you know, the energy mix will naturally
change over time as technology changes, as we have advances.
(12:42):
But you can't be at a university and draw something
on the whiteboard and demand that it happens. So I
say that molecules each policy for lunch pretty much every
day of the week. You can't just will stuff. And unfortunately,
this climate religion, which is what it has, you know,
(13:02):
has been the ruin of many people. And you know, Germany,
I don't know if you saw this.
Speaker 1 (13:07):
I am painfully where I followed Germany's economy and they've
done it to themselves. They're a cautionary tale for the
whole planet. They really are.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
And uh, Chancellor Mertz came out I think yesterday or
when or Tuesday, if forget what today it is myself
and said, hey, we need nuclear power in Germany. That
was a huge mistake, thankfully, and they don't usually do
that to themselves and they.
Speaker 1 (13:29):
Admit some mistakes. No, that's not very German. Yeah, it's
not here. You are stereotyping. We're painting with the broad
brush breakan. You know, that's not a lot on the
fifty five. They want to show you all those Germans
out there who are not who are not afraid of
admitting when they're wrong. Congrats to you. You buck the trend.
Speaker 2 (13:44):
Well, you know, if you think about the Germans are
very efficient, they're engineers.
Speaker 1 (13:48):
They used to have gotten it right.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
But Nick Seville, Nick Suvill, not so much.
Speaker 1 (13:54):
Isn't that true? Yeah, it's just it's crazy and you
know the weird thing. And we'll get to that nuclear
policy coming up. That's one of my favorite topics because
you know, if okay, so I can't convince you that
you've been duped by the climate religion, that you are
a useful idiot. You don't believe that you think that
climate alarmism is a good thing and that carbon diox
that is a bad thing. The answer to everyone's prayers
then is nuclear power is nuclear. We'll talk about that
(14:17):
with Brigham Account, Hudson Institute dot org, Charge Conversations online
for your podcast and the best in the business, Fast
and pro Roofing. I love Fast and pro Roofing. They've
been coming up from the top of the our and
it is Corey Bowman. Yes, former maryl candidate Corey Bowman,
still minister Corey Bowman and still community activist Corey Bowman.
We'll talk to him at eight oh five Fast Forward
one hour. Jack Winsor, editor in chief the Ohio Press Network,
(14:38):
host of The Windsor Reports. Speaking of podcasts, we'll talk
about immigrations and custom enforcement here in Ohio, as well
as comments about property taxes in Ohio, hot topic of
conversation as we consider who the nextcubernatorial candidate or our
next governor will be in the meantime in studio from
Hudson dot org. That's the Hudson website, our energy policy expert,
Brigham Account, Charged Conversations. Excuse me, so if there's moving
(15:05):
over to nuclear power since we talked, you know, generally
speaking about the needs, the demand increasing, the regulatory hurdles
that are impediments to let's say the seven to ten
years it takes to get a natural gas plant online.
If that's bad, the regulatory impediments to using nuclear power
totally carbon free, small footprint. They put them in submarines,
(15:27):
which have never had a problem. We've been doing submarine
nuke power since nineteen fifties. Bring them. How come we
can't have it ourselves? But it is a push now. Yeah,
the the green alarmists, while they never embraced nuke, in fact,
they rejected it completely out of hand. It's the ultimate
miracle to solve their alleged problem and they hated it.
But now because AI companies are online, all these billionaires
(15:50):
like Gates and others are saying, we need to be
able to produce our unpound power. They're really defaulting with
small modular reactors. They are.
Speaker 2 (15:58):
And to your point, and as an ave I will say, yeah,
we created the first SMMR is a long time ago.
They fit inside a submarine, they'd fit inside fifteen fifty. Yeah, Yeah,
we've had nuclear powered guided missile cruisers in the past
as well, and today's nuclear technology very different from the
nineteen fifties, nineteen sixties.
Speaker 1 (16:19):
Years light years.
Speaker 2 (16:20):
You know, I like my dad's sixty six Mustang, but truthfully,
wasn't that good of a car.
Speaker 1 (16:25):
No, it wasn't. I made the mistake of driving my
ultimate dream car at one point was as thinking about
as a daily driver sixty seven fastback Mustang. Oh yeah,
and I got the chance to drive one that had
been rotissary restored affles. Now it's like driving the team
can bridge powers, no power string, no power anything, and
it feels like a death trap. Yep, it just on frame.
(16:45):
I wish I'd never driven its my bubble.
Speaker 2 (16:48):
Ah, but it looks so good. But today's nuclear powers
nothing like the past. When people say, well what about
three Mile Island, Uh, well, which may come back by
the way, different start or Chernobyl, totally different stuff. And yeah,
so one of the things we've done, because you know,
nuclear is a little bit different than your average fired reactor.
(17:10):
It's all about creating heat to make steam to turn turbans.
Speaker 1 (17:15):
Whether it is.
Speaker 2 (17:17):
Whether using coal or nuclear power, it's the same basic philosophy.
And yeah, we need to cut the red tape and
figure out how to do this. We've spent the last
twenty thirty years trying not to build anything right, and
we can't do that. You know, as we've talked about
seven to ten years. When people say well in five years,
wi'll be all driving evs, you know, well that's pretty
(17:39):
interesting because five to ten years from now, the power
grid that's outside it's going to be the same.
Speaker 1 (17:44):
Yeah, they don't fix that first.
Speaker 2 (17:45):
Yeah, good look, but yeah, so you know, one new
reactor they run, really they run about ninety eight percent
of the time, twenty four to seven. An average size
reactor can power half a million to three quarter of
a million high homes. A larger reactor well over a million.
So what is that equal? That equals let's see one
(18:05):
million homes. For a large reactor, you would need ten
or eleven million solar panels to do that, assuming we're
in the daylight solar panels.
Speaker 1 (18:16):
And I understand nuke plants do require maintenance, of course,
like anything with moving parts. But you got to go
and polish and clean up those damn solar panels and
they fall apart. You got to replace them. That is
a regular, ongoing twenty four to seven kind of maintenance
upgate project. It is.
Speaker 2 (18:31):
And you know, if you want to have some rooftop
solar or you've got a cabin in the woods or
you know, fill in the blanket.
Speaker 1 (18:37):
Have at it.
Speaker 2 (18:38):
But it can't replace base load power. And base load
power means that amount of power that we need twenty
four to seven, even when you're sleeping. You know, we
don't go below a minimum amount of power.
Speaker 1 (18:49):
That we need.
Speaker 2 (18:51):
That has to be reliable power. And one of the
ways to do that, honestly, is with nuclear and we
are moving forward. No two reactors in the United States
are exactly designed to like.
Speaker 1 (19:05):
Whichy reinvent the wheel every time they build one. That's
the problem.
Speaker 2 (19:08):
Every car is different from the last one.
Speaker 1 (19:10):
That's just crazy on.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
The same assembly line. Well, there is no assembly line.
That's what we're trying to get to with these SMRs
is we license a product and we replicate it and
like plugging in multiple batteries in parallel, you can you
can put these things together. You need more, great, you
need add one, Yeah, well add one.
Speaker 1 (19:29):
It's lego technology. Five years from now, you have a
nuke reactor and put it down next to the one
you previously bought. You can build them in the exact
same way and shape and form and keep them like
any other product on the shelf. I know, I'm boiling
it down to its basic terms. I am not a
nuclear physicist, but that's the concept.
Speaker 2 (19:48):
That's right, and the ideal is it's scalable, less expensive,
and you know, you plug and play as you go.
The other point is, as you mentioned solar panels, which
have a fifteen to well, let's give him the max
twenty five lifespan. Lifespan a nuclear power plant used to
be licensed for fifty years. The new ones that we're
(20:10):
putting in can have an eighty year life cycle.
Speaker 1 (20:14):
Oh well, that sounds like a sound investment. Let's pause.
We'll bring Brigham back to answer the following question. Yeah, Brigham,
but the reason environmentalists hate him is because the nuclear
waste map seven forty eight here fifty five KCD talk
station by the time, was a Brigham account. Hudson ins tout.
He's the host of Charged Conversation podcasts. He is an
energy policy expert. Been talking about energy generation in this country.
(20:37):
So we start with the fact that we do not
generate enough electricity. The green people stood in the way
of creating abundant, reliable power generation plants, whether it be
coal or natural gas or nuclear, something that runs all
the time and then can fill the gaps in left
by the windmill and the sun and the solar panels
which don't work for obvious reasons. And we were talking
(20:58):
about small modular reactors in the last segment. I think
that is the ultimate answer to all of our prayers. Again,
they're individual, they're small in size. They produce abundance of
power with a very small footprint by comparison to the
three mile island version of nuclear plants that we're around
in the nineteen seventies. Yes, technology has advanced and they
don't produce carbon dioxide for people to think it's a
(21:19):
problem with global warming or something. But then riggan, what
about the nuclear waste? Oh my god, we got to
put this nuclear waste someplace? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (21:30):
Have you noticed?
Speaker 1 (21:32):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (21:32):
And you may remember this from law school. When the
facts on your side argue the facts when they're not
argue emotion.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
Yeah, remember that? Yeah? Sure, yeah, So we're all going
to die. That is the it's the tier. You start
with your strongest legal argument, and that by the time
you're at your last legal argument. It's an argument about
a change in law because of public policy. Right, you
need to change the law. You're in desperation mode. On that.
Speaker 2 (21:57):
You are in desperation. And I think you know, again,
this is not the nineteen seventies. We've come a long way.
But even if you took all of the radioactive material
from all of the civilian nuclear power plants to date
and we went up here to I don't know, Moeler Princeton,
take your pick and throw it all on the football field,
it would be less than six feet high.
Speaker 1 (22:18):
All of it, all of it less than six feet high.
And we built that massive hole in the was a
Yuca Mountain out.
Speaker 2 (22:26):
We did, we did which we haven't been able to
use because remember Harry Reid, that guy from Nevada, did
not want it. Yeah, not in my backyard. Actually worked
on that. I worked on the railroad design that was
going to bring that into the mountain. But you know,
there is some low level way, so I'm not including
(22:46):
on my football field analogy, but that stuff breaks down
very quickly because old reactors were not a closed loop,
so you would have some water contamination, very low level.
You know, if you go on a nuclear powered submarine,
which I've had the honor of doing before, and you
have to wear a dociminter just in case. My readings
(23:07):
indicated that I got less exposure for not being in
the sun. So, yeah, this is the thing. And the
new generation reactors, the way they're designed is what we
call closed loop systems. You don't get the volume or
the amount that you got in the past, and a
(23:29):
lot of it is now recycled entirely, so you're generating
very little waste.
Speaker 1 (23:36):
Okay, very little waste compared to the complete totality of
all the waste ever, only being six foot high on
regular standard football field.
Speaker 2 (23:46):
Not the higher enrich stuff. And yeah, it does have
a very long half life, and if we can get
to fusion, that's the ultimate dream. There is no waste
long term, it breaks down so quickly.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
Well, and then there's the question of enrichment. Now we
all learn from the Iranians what it takes to enriched
to nuclear bomb level. That's like in the what eighty
five percent plus range? Yeah, how much enrichment of uranium
needs to be done to get a regular nuclear plant
level fuel.
Speaker 2 (24:14):
Yeah, for most of these advanced designs, it's about three
to five percent.
Speaker 1 (24:17):
Three to five, which is why when the Iranians are like, well.
Speaker 2 (24:20):
This is peaceful, we're at sixty five percent. You know,
nobody should.
Speaker 1 (24:24):
Believe that, now, A little bird told me at one point. Now,
the nuclear reactors on military vessels are a much higher
enrichment level because of the small space.
Speaker 2 (24:34):
Correct and the desire and inaccessibility of or ease of
refueling them.
Speaker 1 (24:41):
Exactly. You had told me off air that in the
old days used to have to cut a hole in
the side of the submarine every twenty years to replace
the nuclear fuel. Modern nuclear actors on modern let's say
aircraft carriers wait for this fun fact, folks, they have
a fifty year lifespan with the reactors, no changing of
fuel at.
Speaker 2 (25:00):
All with the ones we're building now.
Speaker 1 (25:03):
Yes, fifty years. And how fast does that modern aircraft
carrier travel in terms of knots?
Speaker 2 (25:11):
You know, so I think unclassified it will say in
excess of I don't know, twenty five or thirty knots.
Speaker 1 (25:17):
But let's just say it's a lot faster. Yeah, a
lot faster, folks. It doesn't really necessarily confidential information, but
my friends in the Navy know damn well how fast
those things go. And it is almost impossible to believe
faster than like your speedboat there on the Ohio seven
forty five right now, if you bove krese the talk station,
(25:38):
we'll hear from U. We'll get our crime stop or
bad guy the week right out of the gate. Then
we'll finish up with Brigha McGowan on energy policy after
I mentioned share Fax credit Union a better way to
bank share successful thanks to the tips from folks like you.
One more with Brigha McCown Hudson ins too. We've been
talking generally speaking about our ridiculous energy policies and how
they stand in the way of the demand that is
(25:59):
obvious and at and denied by no one. No one
can deny the realities of our need for electricity and
increasing need and it keeps going up a lot, most
notably because of artificial intelligence. But more people on the
planet alone creates demand for more electricity. That's how we live, thrive,
and svive. So with that in the background, knowing full
well that the green alarmists have polluted our elected officials
(26:21):
with this religion, what's the fixed Brigham cleaning them out
and starting with a new slate. I don't know how
you're going to convince people not to turn their back
and become heretics to the climate religion. But we need
congressional action. So there you go. There we are.
Speaker 2 (26:39):
Yeah, you're right, And like a lot of things these days, Congress, DC,
policy politics, it's all polarized. But you know what you've
said is one hundred percent accurate Brian. Energy policy in
America is no later, no longer made in Congress, It's
made in court. And so we have energy policy stopped
being made because Congress stopped making hard decisions a long
(27:03):
time ago. When Congress punts either a president fills the vacuum.
More likely the agencies of that administration fill the vacuum
with regulations. The more detailed regulations are, the more most
of these lawsuits are about procedure, not about outcome, and
they delay things forever, and then courts become the decision makers.
(27:26):
And look, I respect very much judges in this country
as a lawyer myself, but they're not equipped to make
these kind of policies.
Speaker 1 (27:37):
Are our elected officials brig them? Let's cut to the chase.
Can Guam capsize My favorite illustration of the revelation of
the stupidity of our elected officials. I bet you not
a one of them knows anything about the realities of
nuclear reactor production or anything related to the dangers associated
with it, unless it's some opinion piece that some lobbyists
(27:57):
handed to them.
Speaker 2 (27:59):
Well, there are people in Congress that are knowledgeable. I'm
surprised everyone. Every once in a while I'm surprised. But no, no, no, no,
you're you're absolutely right because.
Speaker 1 (28:08):
All of them are not, and the vast majority of
them are not. But yet they're writing laws that hobble us.
Speaker 2 (28:14):
They cripple us, well they are, and or like on
appropriations bills or the budget, they keep punting. And you know,
when you sit back, you talk to Democrats, you're like, well, yeah,
we need permitting reform because I want to build wind
mills and solar panels. You go to the Republicans and
they're like, we need permitting reform because we want to
build our stuff. And you get them both in the room.
(28:37):
You're like, guys, until we have permitting reform, you guys
over here can't build your stuff, and you guys over
here can't build your stuff. Yeah, but we don't want
their stuff. We just want our stuff. I go, well,
that's not how it works. And meanwhile, not only can
we not build energy, we can't build any infrastructure.
Speaker 1 (28:53):
Get rid. Okay, here's the answer to the question. Got
your green side, you got your practical side. Both of
them want there permitting reform. Don't want the other guys
permitting reform. Your point is, get rid of a reform
all of it. Everybody's project can be approved as easily
as the next guys. Now, competition is in full play
with no government manipulation. Are you gonna build a solar
(29:16):
panel array or you're gonna build a small modular reactor?
And what's gonna give you the better bang for the buck?
What's gonna get approved the small modular reactor? Yes?
Speaker 2 (29:25):
And you know what, you let the uh we say
this all the time. Let the consumers decide what they want.
If you're in California and you want five dollar gas,
then fine, you're gonna have five dollar gas policies.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
Move there.
Speaker 2 (29:36):
If you want solar panels in California, great solar panels
are great where the sun shines. You know, we tried
to u there were some people in Alaska said we
need solar panels up.
Speaker 1 (29:46):
Here, like really six months out of the year on.
Speaker 2 (29:50):
The side of the building, literally on the side of
the building because of the angle the single too right.
Speaker 1 (29:54):
But then again, it doesn't it get like completely dark there.
It does half the year, it does, yeh, at least
it's very light for half of the year to depending
on where you are. But it's very dark that solar pail.
It'll better be at the right angle though, as you
point out.
Speaker 2 (30:04):
So let's let's let's you know, use common sense and
deploy the best stuff where it works the best. The
other problem with renewables, as you know, Brian, whether it's
wind or solar is you need a backup system. So
you're creating two systems. It's belt in suspenders. It can supplement,
it can assist.
Speaker 1 (30:25):
Why we can't take the one that needs to be
supplemented if the one who doesn't can be built without
that added expense, just build the thing that works twenty
four to seven and we'll all be happy people and
the price of electricity will ultimately go down. Bring them account.
It's always a pleasure, man. Keep up the great work.
You're always welcome here. On the fifty five Kresey Morning Show.
Find him where you find your podcast, Charged Conversations, produced
(30:47):
by Joe Strecker, of course he does, and of course
online at Hudson dot org for the Hudson Institute's work.
Break him. It's always a pleasure having you man. Have
a great weekend, and I'll look ford to having you
back in here soon. Thanks Brian, I really appreciate it.
My pleasure, indeed some fifty right now. I'll also be
a pleasure talking to Corey Bowman. Apparently he's going to
be
Seven, six fifty five KARROSD talk station with a great
Friday lineup on the heels of the FOP President Ken Kober,
callin Out Shenanigan's the Police Department Tech Friday with Dave
Hat Do we get Briga McCowen from the Hudson Institute
in studio fresh off a trip to d C where
he was in fact talking energy policy. I will strongly
encourage you to find his podcast where you get your podcasts.
(00:30):
Charged Conversations. Joe Strecker does that one, doesn't he? He
sure does. A great guy, isn't he He is.
Speaker 2 (00:36):
He's a slave driver as a producer, though, let's be honest,
he's a good producer. He's a great producer that requires,
you know, you heed his warnings and his calls.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
You're going to have to do a retake. So Joe Streker,
producer of podcasts including Charged Conversations. Yeah, Brigha McCown's got
just an unbelievable background and energy policy, which is why
he was in d C and why the Japanese government
assigned you in like an intern or.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
Something they did from the Jackpanese Development Bank.
Speaker 1 (01:01):
That's sort of.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
You know, their government Economic ministry and policy and one,
and they want to know about energy security. So they
sent some folks over for seven weeks to hang out
with us at Hudson and figure it out.
Speaker 1 (01:18):
Energy security by way of what the United States is
going to be doing, by way of pursuing energy production,
oil gas, nukes, whatever it happens to be compared to
the last administration. Of course, in the Obama administration, you know,
your gauge of energy security had to be pretty grim
considering we were not going to invest in anything that
provides reliable electricity. Was all going to be wind bills. Yeah,
(01:41):
and maybe hydro to the extent hasn't been used yet,
solar panels of course, and then unicorns.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
Absolutely, thanks for mentioning unicorns, because that is the magic
mix of things. But you know, in all seriousness, it's
a real topic. And you know Asian countries, but Japan
imports about ninety five percent of the energy that it
needs minus nuclear that it produces. We're so blessed, Brian
to have all these natural resources and to be able
(02:07):
to provide energy fairly, expensively and reliably. That underpins our economy,
our economic security, our national security.
Speaker 1 (02:16):
And so.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
It's something that i've spent many years on and while
I don't agree with everything any administration does, we are
on a much better path than we were.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
We are, and I suppose we should probably just sort
of dive into this whole US power grid concern we've got.
I saw this article yesterday. As a matter of fact,
I had at my stack from American Greatness about Pennsylvania.
They're connecting and get their energy from PJAM Interconnection, which
provides power to basically all of thirteen states, including Pennsylvania District, Columbia,
(02:50):
et cetera. But they released an executive summary and said
that they need a hell of a lot more power
than is even available. And the big problem with this,
and I mentioned it the other day when you talk
about the Democrats scream screaming about affordability, and I mentioned
to you off air my outrageous Duke Bill, all things
(03:11):
being equal, it was a hell of a lot higher.
There's an affordability problem, but it's brought about by our
own stupid rules and regulations. It takes like almost ten
years to get an energy producing project like a natural
gas plant. There's no rocket science involved in that. We've
been doing those for years, but it takes forever to
get it permit you need it. Demonstrably, all these commissions
(03:33):
and all these industry leaders, the people who have electricity demands,
including AI facilities, are screaming out loud about the limited
power delivery. Yeah, but you sorry, We'll wait around because
we have regulations on stacked on regulations. Yeah, we do.
Speaker 2 (03:47):
And that's one of the things that this current administration
through what they're calling the Energy Dominance Council, which really
just means let's get all of the federal agencies together
and figure out how to cut the red tape, figure
out how we can move more quickly. You know, it
used to be that when we wanted to build something,
the permitting the thinking about it would take about two
(04:08):
years and we'd get it on. That has moved to
seven to ten years under successive administrations, and the current
president wants to bring it back to eighteen months. But
a couple things standing in the way. Number one is
the permitting laws themselves need to be changed because people
have figured out how to manipulate the system, and it's
(04:30):
been manipulated not to make it too quick, but to
make it too slow. Because everyone has an opinion about
what they should or should not do well.
Speaker 1 (04:40):
There's a lot of money to be made by fighting
off the building of literally anything there is. There is
all this green money, all this foreign money and influence.
You imagine what the Chinese Communist Party is thinking when
they see us enact legislation that makes it more onerous
and more expensive to produce power. They are laughing their
collective asses off, and in fact, they are pumping out
(05:01):
information that pushes us toward this. CO two is bad
religion that we've all bought hook line and sinker, carbon
dioxide plant food. You can talk about that, but the
idea that these parts per million are a problem. It
just makes it impossible to build efficient energy plants to
produce constant electricity. Period. They love that, Yeah, it really does.
And if you look back, well, well, parenthetically, while they
(05:22):
continue to build multiple coal plants, natural gas plants and
enjoy the benefits of nukew in some degree.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
Yes, and let me talk about the paragrid in just
a second here, But I tell people, well, happy twenty
twenty six. Did you know that in twenty twenty five
the world used more coal than it has in any
year of human history.
Speaker 1 (05:43):
Because we have more people and more people and more
technology is more electricity. Plus, there's a lot of people
on the green side of the equation to think we
need to hook our cars up to the grid, brig them.
I know, right, there's a great idea. Well, and so
you know that grid. And by the way, China I
would give them an a plus and energy security because
they want it all. And people say, well, look they're
(06:05):
producing more solar.
Speaker 2 (06:06):
Well yeah, but we buy them, we buy them, and yes,
they're deploying more of everything because they want as much
energy as they can get because they get it. And
so you know, transmission lines are really the bottleneck of
a two point problem. The first point is we were
forced to retire our own coal fired power plants under
(06:29):
the previous administration.
Speaker 1 (06:30):
Through a throat cutting exercise. The legislation wouldn't have shut
them down, but for the obligation under the law.
Speaker 2 (06:37):
Yes, well, you know, if we need more power, it'll
just magically materialize. Except it hasn't. So right, so we
have a dip in available power as AI data centers
are requiring more and more power cars and if you
want to plug your car into the EV that's more
power too, And that was just supposed to magically sort
itself out. But those same permitting regulations that we need change.
(06:59):
You can't build a power plant either, and then overlay
that with a transmission system that is forty five years
old on average, not designed to handle what we need
it to, not designed to go where people are moving to,
not designed to connect to a power plant that has
(07:19):
yet to be built in a place where there is
no grid. And we have a problem, major problem.
Speaker 1 (07:25):
And you know when you get to states like California
where these decrepit power transmission lines are hanging in dense
forests that haven't been cleared of underbrush, give a massive
potential for wildfires through the well, these power lines dropping.
Speaker 2 (07:39):
And that has happened, has it?
Speaker 1 (07:41):
It has? Indeed, I haven't read anything about that Brigham here,
Yeah it has.
Speaker 2 (07:44):
And by the way, if you're a power company in California,
you are strictly liable for anything that you might cause,
even though the government won't let you upgrade your power
lines and won't let you cut the vegetation.
Speaker 1 (07:54):
Still your fault, right, Or keep the reservoirs filled with water,
life saving water to put fires out, yeah yeah, Or
micromanage the actions of the fire department during major conflictations,
it's a real well. Anyhow to Brigham account, we're going
to continue on this discussion. We've got lots of topics
to go over. Nuclear of course, we will talk about
that energy policy by litigation, on and on and on.
(08:17):
You can find them at Hudson dot org and also
again Charged the Conversations with Brigham account. Find the podcast,
whoever find your podcast, and you'll stay up on these matters.
In between times, he joins the fifty five KRC Morning
Show seven fifteen Right now fifty five KRCD talk station
looking for a world class deep talk station seven nineteen,
fifty five krc DE talk station. Very happy Friday to
(08:39):
you spending an hour here in studio. Brigham account from
Hudson In's too. He's responsible for Charge to Conversations and
aim suggests what he talks about, which is energy policy.
An expert in energy policy, he is even so much
so that they called him up to DC to spend
some time talking with the experts there about where our
economic future, our energy policy future is going, and hope
to God, it's repealing rules, right regulations and impediments to
(09:01):
fixing our grid, to building new reliable power sources. To
meeting the demands of the general American public, not just
for some AI facility, but for all of us. I mean,
Lord almighty, you know what it's like to deal without
your Verizon phone for ten hours? What about if the
lights go out for ten, fifteen, twenty hours because they
can't meet the demands And that has happened before, and
they talk about it more and more brigging.
Speaker 2 (09:22):
They have, and there would be total chaos. Could you
imagine if we went two or three days without electricity?
Speaker 1 (09:27):
Well, we've been through that, and like, oh they're storms,
storms that came through. Yeah, it's a big deal, it is.
Speaker 2 (09:32):
And you know, energy underpins our entire life. We can't
do anything without it. We can't go out to shop,
we can't read, we can't connect bank, buy food, keep
it cold.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
Well, someone had said that the other day was an
article about the power going off and how they were
freezing in their own homes because there hadn't been power
in a few days. And they had just gone to
the grocery store and had their entire fridge filled with
fresh And I said to myself, just put them out outside.
You're not going to have your grocery spoiled. Anyway. But
it is a legitimate problem. People die.
Speaker 2 (10:06):
It is, it is, And you know it's interesting you
raise that point because climate activists will talk about how
climate change is killing people. Yet more people die in
Europe lack of air conditioning than anything else. Throw people
die if they freeze to death. I think you know
the metrics we've been a little bit off on, and
it is extremely important that we have affordable and reliable power.
(10:31):
And you know, I'll tell you aroun a lot of
the upgrades that have to happen, we're gonna have to
rear where that money's going to come from, because you
know those aren't free either.
Speaker 1 (10:40):
No, you should pay for them. No, And it's in
furtherance of your point. I have to recommend my listeners.
And I mentioned this in my earlier comments in the
five o'clock hour. Worth finding. I think you'll find it
on OutKick. I believe that is a website. I found
the article from Ian Miller on zero Head, who was
reposted there headlined twenty years later. And Inconvenient Truth, which
(11:03):
is Al Gore's two thousand and six documentary, and Inconvenient
Truth has been thoroughly debunked, and they walk through all
of his gloom and doom claims and point out that
every single one of them has not come true at all.
In fact, some are The situation now is even better
than it was when al Gore was predicting we were
all gonna die. This is a load of crap, Brigham,
you know it is.
Speaker 2 (11:23):
And I think there are well intentioned people, and look,
we all wanted to dupe.
Speaker 1 (11:26):
They're useful idiots, Brigham. Let's call them what they are. Well,
they listens, got okay, they got misguided. I don't know
if he was making it up as he goes along,
like they did with all these COVID nineteen ten foot rules.
But you know what he said didn't come true. We
get twenty years to look at. And the other point
the article makes it, it's extremely valuable. One. He starts
(11:48):
with carbon dioxide readings in the nineteen fifties. The planet's
four and a half billion years old, and the furthest
back there, the farthest back they can go with like
bor sampling with Arctic ice, it's six hundred and fIF
thousand years, which still represents only a fraction of the
time the globe has been around. You know, we've made
it this far with ebbs and flows the carbon dioxide.
The plants love it, so I think we're gonna be
(12:09):
just fine. Plus it's so slow, this incremental increase of
CO two. Even if you think it's going to have
an impact, we will be able to deal with it
by moving and adjusting as time rolls on.
Speaker 2 (12:21):
We have to do it now, absolutely, you know. And
one of the things I talk about is something called
the energy mix, and that is where do we get
all of our energy from? Right, And just like a
carpenter doesn't use a hammer on everything, I've tried, it
doesn't work. Yeah, you know, the energy mix will naturally
change over time as technology changes, as we have advances.
(12:42):
But you can't be at a university and draw something
on the whiteboard and demand that it happens. So I
say that molecules each policy for lunch pretty much every
day of the week. You can't just will stuff. And unfortunately,
this climate religion, which is what it has, you know,
(13:02):
has been the ruin of many people. And you know, Germany,
I don't know if you saw this.
Speaker 1 (13:07):
I am painfully where I followed Germany's economy and they've
done it to themselves. They're a cautionary tale for the
whole planet. They really are.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
And uh, Chancellor Mertz came out I think yesterday or
when or Tuesday, if forget what today it is myself
and said, hey, we need nuclear power in Germany. That
was a huge mistake, thankfully, and they don't usually do
that to themselves and they.
Speaker 1 (13:29):
Admit some mistakes. No, that's not very German. Yeah, it's
not here. You are stereotyping. We're painting with the broad
brush breakan. You know, that's not a lot on the
fifty five. They want to show you all those Germans
out there who are not who are not afraid of
admitting when they're wrong. Congrats to you. You buck the trend.
Speaker 2 (13:44):
Well, you know, if you think about the Germans are
very efficient, they're engineers.
Speaker 1 (13:48):
They used to have gotten it right.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
But Nick Seville, Nick Suvill, not so much.
Speaker 1 (13:54):
Isn't that true? Yeah, it's just it's crazy and you
know the weird thing. And we'll get to that nuclear
policy coming up. That's one of my favorite topics because
you know, if okay, so I can't convince you that
you've been duped by the climate religion, that you are
a useful idiot. You don't believe that you think that
climate alarmism is a good thing and that carbon diox
that is a bad thing. The answer to everyone's prayers
then is nuclear power is nuclear. We'll talk about that
(14:17):
with Brigham Account, Hudson Institute dot org, Charge Conversations online
for your podcast and the best in the business, Fast
and pro Roofing. I love Fast and pro Roofing. They've
been coming up from the top of the our and
it is Corey Bowman. Yes, former maryl candidate Corey Bowman,
still minister Corey Bowman and still community activist Corey Bowman.
We'll talk to him at eight oh five Fast Forward
one hour. Jack Winsor, editor in chief the Ohio Press Network,
(14:38):
host of The Windsor Reports. Speaking of podcasts, we'll talk
about immigrations and custom enforcement here in Ohio, as well
as comments about property taxes in Ohio, hot topic of
conversation as we consider who the nextcubernatorial candidate or our
next governor will be in the meantime in studio from
Hudson dot org. That's the Hudson website, our energy policy expert,
Brigham Account, Charged Conversations. Excuse me, so if there's moving
(15:05):
over to nuclear power since we talked, you know, generally
speaking about the needs, the demand increasing, the regulatory hurdles
that are impediments to let's say the seven to ten
years it takes to get a natural gas plant online.
If that's bad, the regulatory impediments to using nuclear power
totally carbon free, small footprint. They put them in submarines,
(15:27):
which have never had a problem. We've been doing submarine
nuke power since nineteen fifties. Bring them. How come we
can't have it ourselves? But it is a push now. Yeah,
the the green alarmists, while they never embraced nuke, in fact,
they rejected it completely out of hand. It's the ultimate
miracle to solve their alleged problem and they hated it.
But now because AI companies are online, all these billionaires
(15:50):
like Gates and others are saying, we need to be
able to produce our unpound power. They're really defaulting with
small modular reactors. They are.
Speaker 2 (15:58):
And to your point, and as an ave I will say, yeah,
we created the first SMMR is a long time ago.
They fit inside a submarine, they'd fit inside fifteen fifty. Yeah, Yeah,
we've had nuclear powered guided missile cruisers in the past
as well, and today's nuclear technology very different from the
nineteen fifties, nineteen sixties.
Speaker 1 (16:19):
Years light years.
Speaker 2 (16:20):
You know, I like my dad's sixty six Mustang, but truthfully,
wasn't that good of a car.
Speaker 1 (16:25):
No, it wasn't. I made the mistake of driving my
ultimate dream car at one point was as thinking about
as a daily driver sixty seven fastback Mustang. Oh yeah,
and I got the chance to drive one that had
been rotissary restored affles. Now it's like driving the team
can bridge powers, no power string, no power anything, and
it feels like a death trap. Yep, it just on frame.
(16:45):
I wish I'd never driven its my bubble.
Speaker 2 (16:48):
Ah, but it looks so good. But today's nuclear powers
nothing like the past. When people say, well what about
three Mile Island, Uh, well, which may come back by
the way, different start or Chernobyl, totally different stuff. And yeah,
so one of the things we've done, because you know,
nuclear is a little bit different than your average fired reactor.
(17:10):
It's all about creating heat to make steam to turn turbans.
Speaker 1 (17:15):
Whether it is.
Speaker 2 (17:17):
Whether using coal or nuclear power, it's the same basic philosophy.
And yeah, we need to cut the red tape and
figure out how to do this. We've spent the last
twenty thirty years trying not to build anything right, and
we can't do that. You know, as we've talked about
seven to ten years. When people say well in five years,
wi'll be all driving evs, you know, well that's pretty
(17:39):
interesting because five to ten years from now, the power
grid that's outside it's going to be the same.
Speaker 1 (17:44):
Yeah, they don't fix that first.
Speaker 2 (17:45):
Yeah, good look, but yeah, so you know, one new
reactor they run, really they run about ninety eight percent
of the time, twenty four to seven. An average size
reactor can power half a million to three quarter of
a million high homes. A larger reactor well over a million.
So what is that equal? That equals let's see one
(18:05):
million homes. For a large reactor, you would need ten
or eleven million solar panels to do that, assuming we're
in the daylight solar panels.
Speaker 1 (18:16):
And I understand nuke plants do require maintenance, of course,
like anything with moving parts. But you got to go
and polish and clean up those damn solar panels and
they fall apart. You got to replace them. That is
a regular, ongoing twenty four to seven kind of maintenance
upgate project. It is.
Speaker 2 (18:31):
And you know, if you want to have some rooftop
solar or you've got a cabin in the woods or
you know, fill in the blanket.
Speaker 1 (18:37):
Have at it.
Speaker 2 (18:38):
But it can't replace base load power. And base load
power means that amount of power that we need twenty
four to seven, even when you're sleeping. You know, we
don't go below a minimum amount of power.
Speaker 1 (18:49):
That we need.
Speaker 2 (18:51):
That has to be reliable power. And one of the
ways to do that, honestly, is with nuclear and we
are moving forward. No two reactors in the United States
are exactly designed to like.
Speaker 1 (19:05):
Whichy reinvent the wheel every time they build one. That's
the problem.
Speaker 2 (19:08):
Every car is different from the last one.
Speaker 1 (19:10):
That's just crazy on.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
The same assembly line. Well, there is no assembly line.
That's what we're trying to get to with these SMRs
is we license a product and we replicate it and
like plugging in multiple batteries in parallel, you can you
can put these things together. You need more, great, you
need add one, Yeah, well add one.
Speaker 1 (19:29):
It's lego technology. Five years from now, you have a
nuke reactor and put it down next to the one
you previously bought. You can build them in the exact
same way and shape and form and keep them like
any other product on the shelf. I know, I'm boiling
it down to its basic terms. I am not a
nuclear physicist, but that's the concept.
Speaker 2 (19:48):
That's right, and the ideal is it's scalable, less expensive,
and you know, you plug and play as you go.
The other point is, as you mentioned solar panels, which
have a fifteen to well, let's give him the max
twenty five lifespan. Lifespan a nuclear power plant used to
be licensed for fifty years. The new ones that we're
(20:10):
putting in can have an eighty year life cycle.
Speaker 1 (20:14):
Oh well, that sounds like a sound investment. Let's pause.
We'll bring Brigham back to answer the following question. Yeah, Brigham,
but the reason environmentalists hate him is because the nuclear
waste map seven forty eight here fifty five KCD talk
station by the time, was a Brigham account. Hudson ins tout.
He's the host of Charged Conversation podcasts. He is an
energy policy expert. Been talking about energy generation in this country.
(20:37):
So we start with the fact that we do not
generate enough electricity. The green people stood in the way
of creating abundant, reliable power generation plants, whether it be
coal or natural gas or nuclear, something that runs all
the time and then can fill the gaps in left
by the windmill and the sun and the solar panels
which don't work for obvious reasons. And we were talking
(20:58):
about small modular reactors in the last segment. I think
that is the ultimate answer to all of our prayers. Again,
they're individual, they're small in size. They produce abundance of
power with a very small footprint by comparison to the
three mile island version of nuclear plants that we're around
in the nineteen seventies. Yes, technology has advanced and they
don't produce carbon dioxide for people to think it's a
(21:19):
problem with global warming or something. But then riggan, what
about the nuclear waste? Oh my god, we got to
put this nuclear waste someplace? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (21:30):
Have you noticed?
Speaker 1 (21:32):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (21:32):
And you may remember this from law school. When the
facts on your side argue the facts when they're not
argue emotion.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
Yeah, remember that? Yeah? Sure, yeah, So we're all going
to die. That is the it's the tier. You start
with your strongest legal argument, and that by the time
you're at your last legal argument. It's an argument about
a change in law because of public policy. Right, you
need to change the law. You're in desperation mode. On that.
Speaker 2 (21:57):
You are in desperation. And I think you know, again,
this is not the nineteen seventies. We've come a long way.
But even if you took all of the radioactive material
from all of the civilian nuclear power plants to date
and we went up here to I don't know, Moeler Princeton,
take your pick and throw it all on the football field,
it would be less than six feet high.
Speaker 1 (22:18):
All of it, all of it less than six feet high.
And we built that massive hole in the was a
Yuca Mountain out.
Speaker 2 (22:26):
We did, we did which we haven't been able to
use because remember Harry Reid, that guy from Nevada, did
not want it. Yeah, not in my backyard. Actually worked
on that. I worked on the railroad design that was
going to bring that into the mountain. But you know,
there is some low level way, so I'm not including
(22:46):
on my football field analogy, but that stuff breaks down
very quickly because old reactors were not a closed loop,
so you would have some water contamination, very low level.
You know, if you go on a nuclear powered submarine,
which I've had the honor of doing before, and you
have to wear a dociminter just in case. My readings
(23:07):
indicated that I got less exposure for not being in
the sun. So, yeah, this is the thing. And the
new generation reactors, the way they're designed is what we
call closed loop systems. You don't get the volume or
the amount that you got in the past, and a
(23:29):
lot of it is now recycled entirely, so you're generating
very little waste.
Speaker 1 (23:36):
Okay, very little waste compared to the complete totality of
all the waste ever, only being six foot high on
regular standard football field.
Speaker 2 (23:46):
Not the higher enrich stuff. And yeah, it does have
a very long half life, and if we can get
to fusion, that's the ultimate dream. There is no waste
long term, it breaks down so quickly.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
Well, and then there's the question of enrichment. Now we
all learn from the Iranians what it takes to enriched
to nuclear bomb level. That's like in the what eighty
five percent plus range? Yeah, how much enrichment of uranium
needs to be done to get a regular nuclear plant
level fuel.
Speaker 2 (24:14):
Yeah, for most of these advanced designs, it's about three
to five percent.
Speaker 1 (24:17):
Three to five, which is why when the Iranians are like, well.
Speaker 2 (24:20):
This is peaceful, we're at sixty five percent. You know,
nobody should.
Speaker 1 (24:24):
Believe that, now, A little bird told me at one point. Now,
the nuclear reactors on military vessels are a much higher
enrichment level because of the small space.
Speaker 2 (24:34):
Correct and the desire and inaccessibility of or ease of
refueling them.
Speaker 1 (24:41):
Exactly. You had told me off air that in the
old days used to have to cut a hole in
the side of the submarine every twenty years to replace
the nuclear fuel. Modern nuclear actors on modern let's say
aircraft carriers wait for this fun fact, folks, they have
a fifty year lifespan with the reactors, no changing of
fuel at.
Speaker 2 (25:00):
All with the ones we're building now.
Speaker 1 (25:03):
Yes, fifty years. And how fast does that modern aircraft
carrier travel in terms of knots?
Speaker 2 (25:11):
You know, so I think unclassified it will say in
excess of I don't know, twenty five or thirty knots.
Speaker 1 (25:17):
But let's just say it's a lot faster. Yeah, a
lot faster, folks. It doesn't really necessarily confidential information, but
my friends in the Navy know damn well how fast
those things go. And it is almost impossible to believe
faster than like your speedboat there on the Ohio seven
forty five right now, if you bove krese the talk station,
(25:38):
we'll hear from U. We'll get our crime stop or
bad guy the week right out of the gate. Then
we'll finish up with Brigha McGowan on energy policy after
I mentioned share Fax credit Union a better way to
bank share successful thanks to the tips from folks like you.
One more with Brigha McCown Hudson ins too. We've been
talking generally speaking about our ridiculous energy policies and how
they stand in the way of the demand that is
(25:59):
obvious and at and denied by no one. No one
can deny the realities of our need for electricity and
increasing need and it keeps going up a lot, most
notably because of artificial intelligence. But more people on the
planet alone creates demand for more electricity. That's how we live, thrive,
and svive. So with that in the background, knowing full
well that the green alarmists have polluted our elected officials
(26:21):
with this religion, what's the fixed Brigham cleaning them out
and starting with a new slate. I don't know how
you're going to convince people not to turn their back
and become heretics to the climate religion. But we need
congressional action. So there you go. There we are.
Speaker 2 (26:39):
Yeah, you're right, And like a lot of things these days, Congress, DC,
policy politics, it's all polarized. But you know what you've
said is one hundred percent accurate Brian. Energy policy in
America is no later, no longer made in Congress, It's
made in court. And so we have energy policy stopped
being made because Congress stopped making hard decisions a long
(27:03):
time ago. When Congress punts either a president fills the vacuum.
More likely the agencies of that administration fill the vacuum
with regulations. The more detailed regulations are, the more most
of these lawsuits are about procedure, not about outcome, and
they delay things forever, and then courts become the decision makers.
(27:26):
And look, I respect very much judges in this country
as a lawyer myself, but they're not equipped to make
these kind of policies.
Speaker 1 (27:37):
Are our elected officials brig them? Let's cut to the chase.
Can Guam capsize My favorite illustration of the revelation of
the stupidity of our elected officials. I bet you not
a one of them knows anything about the realities of
nuclear reactor production or anything related to the dangers associated
with it, unless it's some opinion piece that some lobbyists
(27:57):
handed to them.
Speaker 2 (27:59):
Well, there are people in Congress that are knowledgeable. I'm
surprised everyone. Every once in a while I'm surprised. But no, no, no, no,
you're you're absolutely right because.
Speaker 1 (28:08):
All of them are not, and the vast majority of
them are not. But yet they're writing laws that hobble us.
Speaker 2 (28:14):
They cripple us, well they are, and or like on
appropriations bills or the budget, they keep punting. And you know,
when you sit back, you talk to Democrats, you're like, well, yeah,
we need permitting reform because I want to build wind
mills and solar panels. You go to the Republicans and
they're like, we need permitting reform because we want to
build our stuff. And you get them both in the room.
(28:37):
You're like, guys, until we have permitting reform, you guys
over here can't build your stuff, and you guys over
here can't build your stuff. Yeah, but we don't want
their stuff. We just want our stuff. I go, well,
that's not how it works. And meanwhile, not only can
we not build energy, we can't build any infrastructure.
Speaker 1 (28:53):
Get rid. Okay, here's the answer to the question. Got
your green side, you got your practical side. Both of
them want there permitting reform. Don't want the other guys
permitting reform. Your point is, get rid of a reform
all of it. Everybody's project can be approved as easily
as the next guys. Now, competition is in full play
with no government manipulation. Are you gonna build a solar
(29:16):
panel array or you're gonna build a small modular reactor?
And what's gonna give you the better bang for the buck?
What's gonna get approved the small modular reactor? Yes?
Speaker 2 (29:25):
And you know what, you let the uh we say
this all the time. Let the consumers decide what they want.
If you're in California and you want five dollar gas,
then fine, you're gonna have five dollar gas policies.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
Move there.
Speaker 2 (29:36):
If you want solar panels in California, great solar panels
are great where the sun shines. You know, we tried
to u there were some people in Alaska said we
need solar panels up.
Speaker 1 (29:46):
Here, like really six months out of the year on.
Speaker 2 (29:50):
The side of the building, literally on the side of
the building because of the angle the single too right.
Speaker 1 (29:54):
But then again, it doesn't it get like completely dark there.
It does half the year, it does, yeh, at least
it's very light for half of the year to depending
on where you are. But it's very dark that solar pail.
It'll better be at the right angle though, as you
point out.
Speaker 2 (30:04):
So let's let's let's you know, use common sense and
deploy the best stuff where it works the best. The
other problem with renewables, as you know, Brian, whether it's
wind or solar is you need a backup system. So
you're creating two systems. It's belt in suspenders. It can supplement,
it can assist.
Speaker 1 (30:25):
Why we can't take the one that needs to be
supplemented if the one who doesn't can be built without
that added expense, just build the thing that works twenty
four to seven and we'll all be happy people and
the price of electricity will ultimately go down. Bring them account.
It's always a pleasure, man. Keep up the great work.
You're always welcome here. On the fifty five Kresey Morning Show.
Find him where you find your podcast, Charged Conversations, produced
(30:47):
by Joe Strecker, of course he does, and of course
online at Hudson dot org for the Hudson Institute's work.
Break him. It's always a pleasure having you man. Have
a great weekend, and I'll look ford to having you
back in here soon. Thanks Brian, I really appreciate it.
My pleasure, indeed some fifty right now. I'll also be
a pleasure talking to Corey Bowman. Apparently he's going to
be
Brian Thomas News
Popular Podcasts
Two Guys, Five Rings: Matt, Bowen & The Olympics
Two Guys (Bowen Yang and Matt Rogers). Five Rings (you know, from the Olympics logo). One essential podcast for the 2026 Milan-Cortina Winter Olympics. Bowen Yang (SNL, Wicked) and Matt Rogers (Palm Royale, No Good Deed) of Las Culturistas are back for a second season of Two Guys, Five Rings, a collaboration with NBC Sports and iHeartRadio. In this 15-episode event, Bowen and Matt discuss the top storylines, obsess over Italian culture, and find out what really goes on in the Olympic Village.
iHeartOlympics: The Latest
Listen to the latest news from the 2026 Winter Olympics.
Milan Cortina Winter Olympics
The 2026 Winter Olympics in Milan Cortina are here and have everyone talking. iHeartPodcasts is buzzing with content in honor of the XXV Winter Olympics We’re bringing you episodes from a variety of iHeartPodcast shows to help you keep up with the action. Follow Milan Cortina Winter Olympics so you don’t miss any coverage of the 2026 Winter Olympics, and if you like what you hear, be sure to follow each Podcast in the feed for more great content from iHeartPodcasts.