Daily Caller
Reality Finally Returns To Energy Industry

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By David Blackmon
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.
Daily Caller
US Halts Construction of Five Offshore Wind Projects Due To National Security

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
Interior Secretary Doug Burgum leveled the Trump administration’s latest broadside at the struggling U.S. offshore wind industry on Monday, ordering an immediate suspension of activities at the five big wind projects currently in development.
“Today we’re sending notifications to the five large offshore wind projects that are under construction that their leases will be suspended due to national security concerns,” Burgum told Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo. “During this time of suspension, we’ll work with the companies to try to find a mitigation. But we completed the work that President Trump has asked us to do. The Department of War has come back conclusively that the issues related to these large offshore wind programs have created radar interference that creates a genuine risk for the U.S.”
Predictably, reaction to Burgum’s order was immediate, with opponents of offshore wind praising the move, and industry supporters slamming it. In Semafor’s energy-related newsletter on Tuesday, energy and climate editor Tim McDowell quotes an unnamed ex-Energy Department official as claiming, “the Pentagon and intelligence services, which are normally sensitive to even extremely low-probability risks, never flagged this as a concern previously.” (RELATED: Trump Admin Orders Offshore Wind Farm Pauses Over ‘National Security Risks’)
Yet, a simple 30-second Google search finds a wealth of articles going back to as early as October 2014 discussing ways to mitigate the long-ago identified issue of interference with air defense radars by these enormous windmills, some of which are taller than the Eiffel Tower. It is a simple fact that the issue was repeatedly raised during the Biden Administration’s mad rush to speed these giant windmill operations into the construction phase by cutting corners in the permitting process.
In May, 2024, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s (BOEM) own analysis related to the Atlantic Shores South project contains a detailed discussion of the potential impacts and suggests multiple ways to mitigate for them. An Oct. 29, 2024 memo of understanding between BOEM and the Biden Department of Defense calls for increased collaboration between the two departments as a response to concerns from members of Congress and others related to these very long-known potential impacts.
The Georgia Tech Research Institute published a study dated June 6, 2022 detailing “Radar Impacts, Potential Mitigation, from Offshore Wind Turbines.” That study was in fact commissioned by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM), a private non-profit that functions as an advisory group to the federal government.
Oh.
A report published in February 2024 by International Defense Security & Technology, Inc. describes the known issues thusly:
“Wind turbines can create clutter on radar screens in a number of ways. First, the metal towers and blades of wind turbines can reflect radar signals. This can create false returns on radar screens, which can make it difficult to detect and track real targets.
“Second, the rotating blades of wind turbines can create a Doppler effect on radar signals. This can cause real targets to appear to be moving at different speeds than they actually are. This can also make it difficult to track real targets.”
The simple Google search I conducted returns hundreds of articles dating all the way back to 2006 related to this long-known yet unresolved issue that could present a very real threat to national security. The fact that the Biden administration, in its religious zeal to speed these enormous offshore industrial projects into the construction phase, chose to downplay and ignore this threat in no way obligates his successor in office to commit the same dereliction of duty.
Some wind proponents are cynically raising concerns that a future Democratic administration could use this example as justification for cancelling oil and gas projects. It’s as if they’ve all forgotten about the previous four years of the Autopen presidency, which featured Joe Biden’s Day 1 order cancelling the 80% completed Keystone XL pipeline, a year-long moratorium on LNG export permitting, an attempt to set aside more than 200 million acres of the U.S. offshore from future leasing, and too many other destructive moves to detail here.
Again, a simple web search reveals that experts all over the world believe this is a real problem. If so, it needs to be addressed as a matter of national security. Burgum is intent on doing that. All half-baked talking points aside, this really isn’t complicated.
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.
Daily Caller
While Western Nations Cling to Energy Transition, Pragmatic Nations Produce Energy and Wealth

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
History will likely remember 2025 as the year energy corporatists finally stopped pretending there is a climate crisis. For a decade, a bizarre theater of the absurd played out as titans of the oil and gas industry apologized for their core business while pledging allegiance to a “green transition” that existed mostly in the imaginations of Western bureaucrats. But the curtain has seemingly fallen.
ExxonMobil, one of the world’s largest energy producers, has slashed $10 billion from its low-carbon investment commitments through 2030. Simultaneously, the company announced that it expects $25 billion in earnings growth from 2024 to 2030 to be powered primarily by increases in oil and gas production, which will push daily output to 5.5 million barrels of oil equivalent by the end of the decade.
This is not a company abandoning climate responsibility but rather at last recognizing what has long been obvious: The path prescribed by the climate industrial complex is economically destructive and operationally impossible – even with massive government subsidies.
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
For years, the global energy strategy has been surreal. Companies that built the modern world on the back of energy-dense hydrocarbons indulged those celebrating the arrival of wind turbines and solar panels to power civilization. But reality, stubborn and unforgiving, has interrupted the psychedelic revelry.
ExxonMobil’s low-carbon investments will be paced to policy support and customer demand, says the company. That is corporate speak meaning that spending on green projects is paused unless the government – using our tax dollars – subsidizes the risk or until a market exists.
Megaprojects, once heralded as the future, are now in line for deferral. Why? Because without taxpayer handouts, the economics of trying to bury underground a plant food like carbon dioxide simply do not work – and defy common sense.
The energy sector is pivoting from a strategy of “grow clean at all costs” to “returns first, transition last.” “Green” projects are being relegated to a secondary capital bucket – a token for good PR instead of a core activity.
Europe’s Shell and Aker BP and Canada’s Enbridge have withdrawn from the Science Based Targets initiative to establish “science-based emissions reductions.” This was a retreat from what is described as a “credible, science-based net-zero framework” because there was neither credibility nor science. It was a political suicide pact. The energy giants looked at the cliff’s edge and refused to jump.
British multinational BP, having abandoned its promise to go “Beyond Petroleum,” has raised its oil and gas spending and softened its renewable targets.
ENEOS Holdings, a Japanese refiner, has discarded hydrogen production targets, with CEO Tomohide Miyata explaining that “the shift toward a carbon-neutral society appears to be slowing.”
These U-turns represent a renaissance in policy realism. Energy needs do not disappear because politicians make speeches at climate summits or corporations allocate funds to ESG programs or governments attempt to control consumption and choices of appliances and automobiles.
Second thoughts about an inevitably doomed “green” transition is a victory for the single mother in the U.S. trying to budget for winter heating and for the small business owner in the U.K. whose margins are crushed by one of the highest commercial electricity rates in the world. And for the billions of people in developing nations, this pivot could be salvation from generational poverty.
The question now is whether governments will recognize what corporations have made clear: that the energy transition was a fantasy infused with scientific language and draped in moralistic gingerbread. Or will they continue to increase subsidies and regulations?
Very likely, there will be a bifurcation: on the one hand, western bureaucracies, particularly in Europe, continuing an economic decline under mandates and taxes, and on the other, pragmatic governments, many of them in Asia, pursuing prosperity with fuels and technologies that work.
Vijay Jayaraj is a Science and Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Fairfax, Va. He holds an M.S. in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the U.K., and a bachelor’s in engineering from Anna University, India. He served as a research associate with the Changing Oceans Research Unit at University of British Columbia, Canada.
-
armed forces1 day agoOttawa’s Newly Released Defence Plan Crosses a Dangerous Line
-
espionage1 day agoCarney Floor Crossing Raises Counterintelligence Questions aimed at China, Former Senior Mountie Argues
-
Health24 hours agoAll 12 Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated Studies Found the Same Thing: Unvaccinated Children Are Far Healthier
-
Energy1 day ago75 per cent of Canadians support the construction of new pipelines to the East Coast and British Columbia
-
Opinion23 hours agoPope Leo XIV’s Christmas night homily
-
Energy2 days agoThe Top News Stories That Shaped Canadian Energy in 2025 and Will Continue to Shape Canadian Energy in 2026
-
armed forces23 hours agoRemembering Afghanistan and the sacrifices of our military families
-
Alberta2 days agoOttawa-Alberta agreement may produce oligopoly in the oilsands


