Reality Finally Returns To Energy Industry

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

Speaking at the opening day of the annual CERAWeek global energy industry gathering in Houston, Saudi Aramco CEO Amin Nasser declared plans for a government subsidized energy transition a failure, saying, “there is more chance of Elvis speaking next than the current plan working!”

He isn’t wrong, and Elvis was nowhere in sight.

Nasser began his speech by telling the audience made up largely of executives in the oil and gas industry and its contractors that, “We can all feel the winds of history in our industry’s sails again.”

Again, he isn’t wrong.

The winds of change have been blowing for well over a year now in favor of placing national energy security concerns over the rank climate alarmism that dominates the narratives surrounding this mythical transition. In fact, that shift began to become apparent at the 2023 CERAWeek gathering, as speaker after speaker emphasized the need to refocus on enhancing energy security after three years and trillions of dollars in debt-funded spending on renewables.

Now, with last November’s re-election of Donald Trump to a second presidency and the Energy Dominance agenda he brings with him, the momentum at the industry’s back is starkly obvious.

But that doesn’t mean that the world will or should abandon the expansion of other forms of energy, including intermittent sources like solar power and stationary batteries.

In this area, Nasser echoed the “all-of-the-above philosophy touted earlier in the Monday agenda by U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright, emphasizing a new model that “reflects the reality of growing demand and energy addition,” while bringing an end to the current practice by many activists and politicians of demonizing oil, gas, and coal.

“Ladies and Gentlemen, the world was promised many things in the current transition plan,” Nasser said. “It was like promising an energy El Dorado. And this quest was equally doomed to fail.”

Noting that the chosen alternatives to fossil fuels currently being heavily subsidized — wind, solar, green hydrogen, and electric vehicles — are unable to even account for incremental energy demands, much less replace fossil fuels, Nasser advocated for a revised effort in which alternatives play a growing role of complementing reliable, conventional energy sources. “I take no pleasure in this. But it is time to stop reinforcing failure. Indeed, as the fictions of the promised transition finally wash away, there is an historic opportunity to change course.”

Nasser’s remarks were largely echoed by Secretary Wright, who promised, “The Trump administration will end the Biden administration’s irrational, quasi-religious policies on climate change that imposed endless sacrifices on our citizens.” Wright also dismissed the previous administration’s focus on climate alarmism over energy security as myopic.

“The Trump administration will treat climate change for what it is — a global physical phenomenon that is a side effect of building the modern world,” Wright said. The energy secretary called Biden’s policies “economically destructive to our businesses and politically polarizing. The cure was far more destructive than the disease.”

Wright also bluntly explained why the Trump administration singled out offshore wind as an especially destructive element of the Biden myopia, while at the same time extolling solar and battery storage as zero-emission ideas that make sense.

Offshore wind’s “incredibly high prices, incredibly huge investment and a large footprint on the local communities, so it’s been very unpopular for people that live near offshore wind turbines,” Wright said. Touting his “all-of-the-above” approach, Wright said the administration supports anything that adds to “affordable, reliable, secure energy,” adding, “Wind has been singled out because it’s had a singularly poor record of driving up prices.”

Emphasizing the inadequacies of the subsidized alternatives to fossil fuels, Wright pointed out that there “is simply no physical way that wind, solar and batteries could replace the myriad uses of natural gas.” He also pointed out that gas currently supplies 43% of power generated on the U.S. grid, a share that is unlikely to be reduced anytime soon.

It all boils down to the simple reality that globalist plans for this government-forced transition have failed. As Nasser said, the time to “stop reinforcing failure” has arrived.

Elvis has left the building.

David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.

Related Topics:#DailyCaller #DavidBlackmon #EnergyIndustry AminNasser CERAWeek feature SaudiAramco

Up Next

Ontario Premier Doug Ford Apologizes To Americans After Threatening Energy Price Hike For Millions

Don't Miss

Carney’s climate plan will continue to cost Canadians

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Former Trump Advisor Says US Must Stop UN ‘Net Zero’ Climate Tax On American Ships

Alberta / 3 hours ago

Enbridge CEO says ‘there’s a good reason’ for Alberta to champion new oil pipeline

Censorship Industrial Complex / 4 hours ago

Canada’s privacy commissioner says he was not consulted on bill to ban dissidents from internet

Business

Former Trump Advisor Says US Must Stop UN ‘Net Zero’ Climate Tax On American Ships

Published on October 15, 2025

Todayville

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Stephen Moore

Later this week the United Nations will hold a vote on a multi-billion climate-change tax targeted squarely at American industry. Without quick and decisive action by the White House, this U.N. tax on fossil fuels will become international law.

This resolution before the International Maritime Organization will impose a carbon tax on cargo and cruise ships that carry $20 trillion of merchandise over international waters. Roughly 80% of the bulkage of world trade is transported by ship.

The resolution is intended to advance the very “net zero” carbon emissions standard that has knee-capped the European economies for years and that American voters have rejected.

This tax is clearly an unnecessary restraint on world trade, thus making all citizens of the world poorer.

It is also an international tax that would be applied to American vessels and, as such, is a dangerous precedent-setting assault on U.S. sovereignty. Since when are American businesses subject to international taxes imposed by the United Nations?

The U.S maritime industry believes the global tax would cost American shippers more than $100 billion over the next seven years if enacted.

Worst of all, if the resolution passes, it will require the retirement of older ships and enable a multi-billion-dollar wealth transfer to China, which has come to dominate shipbuilding in recent years. China STRONGLY supports the tax scheme, even though, ironically, no nation has emitted more pollutants into the atmosphere than they have. Yet WE are getting socked with a tax that indirectly pays for THEIR pollution.

Despite the fact that we pay a disproportionate share of the tax, the U.S. has almost no say on how the revenues are spent. This is the ultimate form of taxation without representation.

Even if the United States chooses not to implement the tax on domestic shipping, it will still be enforced by foreign ports of origin or destination as well as by flag states. As a result, American importers and exporters will be required to pay the tax regardless of domestic policy decisions.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Energy Chris Wright, and Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy have jointly stated that America “will not accept any international environmental agreement that unduly or unfairly burdens the United States or our businesses.” They call the financial impact on the U.S. of this global carbon tax “disastrous, with some estimates forecasting global shipping costs increasing as much as 10% or more.”

The U.S. maritime industry complains that although American vessels carry only about 12% of the globally shipped merchandise, U.S. flag vessels would bear almost 20% of this tax. No wonder China and Europe are for it. The EU nations get 17 yes votes to swamp the one no vote out of Washington.

Unfortunately, right now without White House pressure, we could lose this vote because of defections by our allies.

To prevent this tax, the White House should announce a set of retaliation measures. This could include a dollar-for-dollar reduction in U.S. payments to NATO, the U.N., IMF and World Bank.

At a time when financial markets are dealing with trade disputes, the last thing the world — least of all the United States — needs is a United Nations excise tax on trade.

Stephen Moore is co-founder of Unleash Prosperity and a former Trump senior economic advisor.

Business

Finance Titans May Have Found Trojan Horse For ‘Climate Mandates’

Published on October 14, 2025

Todayville

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Audrey Streb

Major global asset managers including BlackRock and Blackstone have been looking to buy power utilities across America in a move that some industry insiders warn could harm consumers, raise electricity costs and advance a climate-driven energy agenda.

In recent months, Blackstone reportedly sought regulatory approval to buy utilities in New Mexico and Texas all while a BlackRock-led group won approval Friday to purchase a major utility in Minnesota. While BlackRock and other huge asset managers have distanced themselves from environmental, social and governance (ESG) investment practices in recent years, some energy experts and consumer advocates that spoke to the Daily Caller News Foundation are concerned that buying up utilities may represent a new frontier of financial giants orchestrating “climate mandates.”

“BlackRock isn’t just influencing utilities anymore, they’re buying them. After years of ESG-driven coercion that pushed utilities to abandon reliable energy in favor of China-dependent renewables, BlackRock is now taking direct control. The result will be more of the same: higher costs, weaker grids, and millions in unpaid bills, all driven by the very climate mandates they lobbied for,” Jason Isaac, CEO of the American Energy Institute, told the DCNF. “Minnesotans should brace for more unreliable power, rising rates, and a media narrative that blames Trump for ending taxpayer-funded handouts instead of holding the woke politicians and Wall Street elites responsible for the crisis.”

Electricity demand is on the rise after years of stagnancy as the artificial intelligence (AI) race ushers in the build out of power-hungry data centers. Utility costs are also spiking as demand takes off in a trend that dates back to the Biden administration.

Against this backdrop, private investment titans like BlackRock and Blackstone are reportedly moving to buy power utility companies and invest in data center expansions and startups.

Minnesota recently granted the BlackRock-led group known as Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP) approval to buy one of the state’s major power utilities, Allete. GIP is also reportedly on the cusp of acquiring the major energy company, AES, according to sources familiar with the matter that spoke with Reuters. The Financial Times reported that the deal may be for $38 billion.

BlackRock referred the DCNF to Allete’s statement on regulators approving its partnership with GIP and declined to comment further for this story.

Allete’s statement notes that the impending partnership with the BlackRock-led group includes “guaranteed access to capital to fund ALLETE’s five-year plan for advancing transmission and renewable energy goals [and a] $50 million Clean Firm Technology Fund to support regional clean-energy projects and partnerships.”

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) renewed BlackRock’s ability to own up to 20% of utility voting shares in April, with former FERC Commissioner Mark Christie stating that BlackRock “pledged not to use its holdings to influence utility management” and that utilities need the access to capital.

Christie also warned in September 2024 that “this is an issue that deserves much greater scrutiny” and that “the influence that large shareholders, BlackRock or otherwise, can potentially exert across the consumer-serving utility industry should not be underestimated.”

Blackstone has reportedly sought regulatory approval to buy out the Public Service Company of New Mexico and Texas New Mexico Power Co. recently, according to The Associated Press. The asset management giant also secured a 19.9% stake in a Northern Indiana public utility for over $2 billion in January 2024.

“Blackstone’s sustainability strategy prioritizes accelerating decarbonization by investing in the energy transition and driving value accretive emissions reduction in our portfolio,” Blackstone’s 2024 sustainability report states. “We believe the transition to cleaner energy creates meaningful investment opportunities for private capital. For over a decade, we have pursued attractive investments in companies and assets that are part of the global energy transition as part of our broader energy investing strategy.”

Blackstone also announced on Sept. 15 that private equity funds affiliated with Blackstone Energy Transition Partners will acquire the Pennsylvania-based Hill Top Energy Center natural gas plant for almost $1 billion. The company also announced in July that funds managed by Blackstone Infrastructure and Blackstone Real Estate would invest over $25 billion to help build out Pennsylvania’s energy infrastructure to support the AI “revolution.”

“Renewable” energy goals and ESG investment tend to align with emissions-reduction targets, with some power companies, utilities and states that set goals to cut emissions striving to retire conventional energy sources like coal plants. Isaac added that companies like American Electric Power, in which BlackRock owns a significant stake, have been decommissioning coal plants and replacing them with intermittent sources like solar.

“What happens is when the wind stops blowing and the sun stops shining, then you have to ramp those generational assets back up, and that’s when price spikes happen,” Isaac said.

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill professor of finance Greg Brown told the AP that the reason behind these buyouts are “very simple. Because there’s a lot of money to be made.”

Other experts devoted to consumer protection like Executive Director of Consumers’ Research Will Hild told the DCNF that investment companies like BlackRock stand to gain more than just a profit from these purchases.

“There is no world in which BlackRock’s ownership of American energy benefits ordinary American consumers,” Hild told the DCNF. “This is the same firm that proudly brought us the radical ESG rules and Net-Zero nonsense that forced all our energy bills to skyrocket. We wouldn’t have the scourge of woke capitalism without Larry Fink, who already controls nearly $13 trillion in assets and has been sued for violating anti-trust laws.”

ESG investors weigh a company by its social and environmental choices as well as its finances in a move that critics say bogs down businesses with new costs while doing little to combat climate change. One August 2023 InfluenceMap report showed that as Republicans at the state level and in Congress ramped up their opposition to ESG-focused practices, BlackRock and other major U.S. asset managers decreased their support for climate-related resolutions.

BlackRock CEO Larry Fink also said in June 2023 that he no will no longer use the term ESG because it has been “politicized,” less than a year after he noted that climbing energy prices are “accelerating” the green energy transition.

“BlackRock has backpedaled on its ESG messaging and its aggressive, unapologetic imposition of ESG on everything they touch. But the leopard hasn’t changed its spots,” President of the Heartland Institute James Taylor told the DCNF. “It still has the same management group with the same values, and it’s still doing whatever it can to impose ESG on everything it touches, in actuality, if not in name.”

Taylor argued that whether BlackRock buys or acquires a large stake of a utility, it “can now assert itself over legislatures in dictating energy policy.”

Notably, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) threw their weight behind an antitrust lawsuit against major asset managers that alleges the firms colluded to tank coal production with their embrace of zero-emissions goals in May.

The lawsuit, backed by 11 state attorneys general, alleges that BlackRock and multiple other asset managers used their market power to suppress coal production, thereby hurting consumers by causing the price of coal to climb.

The DOJ and FTC’s “support for this baseless case undermines the Trump Administration’s goal of American energy independence,” a BlackRock spokesperson previously told the DCNF. “As we made clear in our earlier motion to dismiss, this case is trying to re-write antitrust law and is based on an absurd theory that coal companies conspired with their shareholders to reduce coal production.”