Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Energy

‘Take On The Resistance’: Who Could Trump Tap To Help Cement His ‘Drill, Baby, Drill’ Agenda?

Published

2 months ago

13 minute read

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By NICK POPE

 

Former President Donald Trump has promised to revitalize and unleash the American energy sector if he returns to the White House in 2025, and has a plethora of former officials and new faces he could tap for key executive branch roles.

The Biden administration has utilized executive agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Department of the Interior (DOI) and the Department of Energy (DOE) to implement many of the key policies driving its sprawling climate agenda. These agencies will be crucial to any effort by a prospective Trump administration to undo President Joe Biden’s energy legacy and execute Trump’s “drill, baby, drill” agenda.

Several insiders with extensive experience in Republican energy politics speculated to the Daily Caller News Foundation as to who Trump could pick to lead that charge if he wins in November.

“I am really impressed by the number of former Trump officials, as well as people who have not served before who are also interested in doing so in the future who have reached out to inquire about my prior experience or the process,” David Bernhardt, who served as the secretary of the interior during the latter half of Trump’s first term, told the DCNF. “If President Trump wins, he’s going to have droves of capable people to choose from to fill his political appointments this time around — a lot of seasoned veterans, and also a lot of people with new, fresh ideas. I think that’s very exciting and bodes well for the president’s second term and for our country.”

However, the Trump campaign told the DCNF that internal discussions about who may fill these roles have not started.

“There have been no such discussions about who will serve in a second Trump Administration,” Karoline Leavitt, the Trump campaign’s national press secretary, told the DCNF. “When the time comes, President Trump will choose the best possible people to implement his America First agenda.”

Whoever Trump selects to lead the EPA will have to confront an agency that has been juiced with thousands of new employees and promulgated numerous major regulations. The Biden administration has used the EPA to advance some of its most aggressive environmental policies, which include a major green power plants regulation, electric vehicle (EV) mandates, stringent fine particulate matter emissions rules and more.

At least some of these rules figure to be on the chopping block if Trump returns to office, as the former president has already pledged to walk back EV regulations.

Andrew Wheeler, who helmed the agency between 2019 and 2021, could be tapped to take the reins again if Trump wins in November, one energy expert, who wishes to not be publicly identified, speculated to the DCNF.

Others who may be under consideration include Mandy Gunasekara, who served variously as EPA chief of staff, principal deputy assistant administrator and senior policy advisor during Trump’s first term.

“I have a beautiful community in Oxford, Mississippi, and it would be very hard to leave. Plus, the idea of going back into a hostile situation away from my children and the ‘Bible girls’ is hard pill to pill to swallow. Ultimately, that’s a bridge I’ll cross if I get there,” Gunasekara told the DCNF. “Andrew Wheeler is a very experienced leader at EPA and would no doubt faithfully execute the President’s agenda again.”

Myron Ebell, a recently-retired energy policy expert formerly at the Competitive Enterprise Institute and a member of the Trump EPA transition team, believes that Gunasekara and Wheeler “would both be great choices,” he told the DCNF.

“I think it’s inappropriate to discuss a position I may be offered,” Wheeler told the DCNF when contacted for this story.

Another name to watch is Anne Vogel, who currently runs the Ohio EPA, according to the energy expert. Prior to taking that role, Vogel worked for the American Electric Power Company, handling federal regulatory matters in Washington, and she also has experience working at a private law firm.

“Director Anne Vogel currently has no intention of leaving her position at Ohio EPA,” a spokesperson for the agency told the DCNF.

Notably, Vogel testified to Congress in March 2023 about the train derailment and subsequent chemical burn-off that marred the skies of East Palestine, Ohio, in February 2023.

“I think that we’re going to need people that are committed to reforming these agencies and advancing the Trump agenda, which is basically unleashing the energy sector, and that includes the coal industry, oil and gas and everything else,” Steve Milloy, a senior legal fellow for the Energy and Environmental Legal Institute and a former member of the Trump EPA transition team, told the DCNF. “They’ve got to be willing to take on the resistance. And in Trump one, people weren’t necessarily willing or prepared to take on the resistance, and there’s going to be a lot of resistance.” 

‘Full Speed Ahead’

As the agency in charge of managing America’s federally-controlled lands and waters, DOI has a major role to play in the American energy sector given that it leases millions of onshore and offshore acres to oil and gas developers. Under Biden and Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, DOI has taken numerous actions to restrict development on millions of acres of American land and issued a bare-bones leasing schedule for offshore oil and gas extraction in the Gulf of Mexico, for example.

In light of Trump’s calls to “drill, baby, drill,” the DOI’s approach to natural resource management is likely to change dramatically from its current attitude as part of the Biden administration.

Tom Pyle, president of the American Energy Alliance, told the DCNF to keep an eye on Republican Govs. Mike Dunleavy of Alaska and Doug Burgum of North Dakota as possible leaders of DOI under a prospective second Trump presidency. However, Burgum may be in play for other positions, such as secretary of the interior or perhaps a high-level White House role, Pyle told the DCNF.

A representative for Burgum referred the DCNF to the Trump campaign.

Both McKenna and Ebell indicated that Bernhardt could be a good fit to return to the top job at DOI should he and Trump have mutual interest. For his part, Bernhardt declined to comment about whether he wants to get back into the fray or specific roles he would ostensibly have interest in filling during a second Trump term.

Pyle said he does not expect Trump to feel an obligation to stick to the establishment when selecting his political appointees.

“It’s clear with President Trump’s vice presidential pick [J.D. Vance] that he no longer feels compelled to extend an olive branch to the GOP establishment,” Pyle told the DCNF. “It’s Trump’s party now, and he chose someone who he thinks will best help implement his agenda.”

Mike McKenna, a GOP strategist with extensive energy sector experience, agreed that Dunleavy and Burgum could each be the type of person to run the DOI for Trump if called upon to do so.

“I hope they will go full speed ahead on restoring or increasing energy production in the federal estate” regardless of who Trump might pick for the top job if he wins, Ebell told the DCNF. “But I also hope that they will focus and put some effort into improving federal land management.”

Ebell floated former Alaska Republican Lt. Gov. Mead Treadwell as a possibility should he have interest. He also said that Republican Sens. John Barrasso of Wyoming and Mike Lee of Utah would both do well in the position, in his view, but that they may both be too valuable as seasoned legislators to make the jump to the executive branch.

“Senator Barrasso is focused on working for the people of Wyoming and passing President Trump’s agenda in the U.S. Senate,” a Barrasso spokesperson told the DCNF.

‘Dark Horse’

Choosing a successor for Jennifer Granholm to lead the DOE will be another key decision for Trump should he prevail this November.

Among other initiatives, the Biden DOE has pushed regulations promoting energy efficient appliances, a broad building decarbonization agenda and sought to loan huge sums of taxpayer cash to green energy companies since 2021.

McKenna, who is plugged into both the energy industry and GOP politics, flagged several possible candidates to look out for.

Paul Dabbar, who served as the under secretary for science at DOE during Trump’s first term, could be an option, with McKenna pointing to his managerial skills as a strength that could appeal to Trump. Dabbar declined to comment when contacted for this story.

McKenna also identified Burgum as a possible option for DOE, but like Pyle, McKenna believes that Burgum could be called on to take any number of roles, stretching from DOE to the White House or even the Department of Commerce, should he have interest in serving in a possible second Trump administration.

One “dark horse” possibility to watch is Bill Cooper, who currently works for Golden Pass LNG as vice president and general counsel, McKenna said. In addition to his private sector mettle, Cooper has experience at DOE, having served in the agency for about two years in various senior roles during Trump’s first term, making him a possible candidate should he have interest in the gig.

Ebell is not discounting the possibility that Trump may dip into the private sector to find his potential energy secretary.

“I think looking in the private sector makes sense,” Ebell told the DCNF. “It makes a lot of sense if it’s somebody who isn’t part of the subsidy chain, who isn’t part of the corporate welfare world, special interests who get money under the so-called Inflation Reduction Act, or other DOE programs.”

Cooper, Treadwell, Lee’s office and Dunleavy’s office did not respond to requests for comment.

Related Topics:

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

More from this author
Daily Caller / 1 hour ago

Union Bigwigs Decline To Endorse Anyone For President Despite Rank-And-File Members Overwhelmingly Backing Trump

Daily Caller / 3 hours ago

Biden-Harris Admin’s Multi-Billion Dollar Electric School Bus Program Is A Huge Gift To China, House Report Finds

Energy / 5 hours ago

US LNG uncertainty is a reminder of lost Canadian opportunities

Daily Caller

Biden-Harris Admin’s Multi-Billion Dollar Electric School Bus Program Is A Huge Gift To China, House Report Finds

Published on September 18, 2024

By

From the Daily Caller News Foundation 

By Owen Klinsky

The Biden-Harris administration’s $5 billion Clean School Bus Program uses nearly 400% more taxpayer dollars per school bus and benefits the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), a House report revealed Tuesday.

The 51-page report from the House Committee on Energy and Commerce found promoting electric school buses and other electric vehicles (EVs) enriches the CCP as the EV supply chain is roughly 90% dependent on China, raising both national security and human rights concerns. It also highlighted immense expenses for taxpayers, with the average electric school bus under the first iteration of the Clean School Bus Program — the first of three iterations — costing $381,191, nearly four times that of a typical full-sized diesel school bus.

“It is clear the $5 billion Clean School Bus Program is overall a failure and, in many cases, a waste of Americans’ hard-earned taxpayer dollars,” Republican Congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers, who chairs the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, said in a statement regarding the report’s findings. “The program, led by the radical Biden-Harris EPA [Environmental Protection Agency], props up a market that relies heavily upon a supply chain dominated by the Chinese Communist Party.”

Funded by the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Clean School Bus Program provided the Biden-Harris EPA with funds over five years to “replace existing school buses with zero-emission and clean school buses.”

China currently accounts for approximately two-thirds of global EV battery cell production, while the U.S. manufactured just 7% as of 2022, raising national security concerns as the U.S. would likely have to depend on Chinese EV technology for its electric school buses, according to the report. Furthermore, the government-subsidized purchases of electric school buses under the Clean School Bus Program incentivize pre-existing human rights abuses in the EV supply, including the use of Uyghur forced labor in China’s Xinjiang region.

The report also identified limited range as an issue, with standard electric school buses from leading manufacturer BlueBird able to travel just 120 miles on a single charge, while some propane models can travel 400 miles before needing to refuel. The range problem can also be exacerbated by cold and warm weather conditions, with a study from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory finding electric transit buses lose roughly a third of their range at 25 degrees Fahrenheit compared to ideal conditions.

Electric school buses also increase the risk of fraud due to a lack of documentation requirements for contractors, with the EPA relying solely on self-certified applications and estimates created by applicants, according to the report. A separate July report from a Maryland county’s Office of the Inspector General resulted in millions of dollars in “wasteful spending.”

“The EPA launched the Clean School Bus program without sufficient safeguards and considerations for practical hurdles applicants may face. For example, the EPA did not require documentation for some of the required application information and allowed contractors enthused at the opportunity to receive federal funding to apply on behalf of unknowing school districts, some of which eventually withdraw from the program,” the report states. “The EPA failed to account for the considerable electric infrastructure upgrades that electrifying a school bus fleet could require, potentially leading to delays for schools in utilizing their new buses.”

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Continue Reading

Energy

US LNG uncertainty is a reminder of lost Canadian opportunities

Published on September 18, 2024

By

From Resource Works 

Canada has missed opportunities to supply Europe with LNG due to political missteps and regulatory barriers, despite having the resources and potential.

For almost three years now, Europe has not been able to figure out how it will replace the cheap, plentiful supply of Russian gas it once enjoyed. Since Russia invaded Ukraine, the EU member states have made drastic moves to curtail their reliance on Russian energy, specifically Russian gas.

In an ideal world, the diversification of the EU’s energy supply would have been Canada’s golden opportunity to use its vast LNG capabilities to fill the gap.

Canada has all the right resources at its disposal to become one of the EU’s premier energy sources, with enormous natural gas reserves lying in the ground and shores upon three of the world’s four oceans. The problem is that Canada lacks both the right infrastructure and the necessary political will to get it built.

The fact that Canada is not a favored supplier of LNG to Europe is the consequence of political missteps and a lack of vision at the highest levels of government. It was reported by the Financial Times that outgoing United States President Joe Biden’s freeze on new LNG export permits and clashes with activists have created uncertainty over future supply growth.

Missteps and onerous regulatory barriers have kept Canada shackled and unable to reach its full potential, leaving us on the sidelines as other countries take the place that should have been Canada’s as an energy supplier for the democratic world.

To this day, European leaders like Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, and Polish President Andrzej Duda have indicated their openness to adding Canadian LNG to their domestic supply.

However, no plans for supplying Canadian LNG to Europe have come to fruition. The absence of any commitment from the federal government to take those possibilities seriously is the result of decisions that now look like major mistakes in hindsight.

Two of these are cancelled energy projects on the Atlantic coast: the Energy East oil pipeline and the proposed expansion of an LNG terminal in New Brunswick.

Canada’s Pacific coast is now a hub of LNG development, with three planned facilities well underway, and there are hungry markets in Asia ready to receive their products. It is a shame that the Atlantic coast is being left behind during Canada’s burgeoning LNG renaissance. The economic situation in the Maritimes has long been challenging, leading to emigration to the Western provinces and stagnation back at home.

LNG projects in British Columbia have proven to be job machines and drivers of economic revitalization in formerly impoverished regions that were gutted when fishing, mining, and forestry went downhill in the 1980s.

The potential to both help Atlantic Canada level back up economically while becoming the bridge for energy exports to Europe was halted by the cancellation of the Energy East pipeline and a proposed LNG terminal in Saint John, New Brunswick.

Proposed by TransCanada (since renamed to TC Energy) to the National Energy Board in 2014, Energy East would have been a 4,600-kilometer pipeline with the capacity to transport over a million barrels of crude oil from Alberta to refineries in New Brunswick and Quebec. While it is true that Europe is more interested in LNG than crude oil, the completion of one great project encourages more and could have gotten the ball rolling on further energy infrastructure.

Had Energy East been constructed, it would have served as a symbol to investors and energy industry players that Canada was serious about west-to-east projects. Unfortunately, in 2017, TransCanada withdrew from the project due to regulatory disagreements and uncertainty.

In 2019, the federal government passed Bill C-69, AKA the “no more pipelines” law, leading to even more complex and restrictive regulations for new energy projects. When there should have been momentum on energy infrastructure building, there came only more cascading bad news.

A proposed expansion of Repsol’s LNG terminal in Saint John, New Brunswick, another potential gateway for Canadian energy to get through to Europe, was abandoned due to the projected high costs and poor business case.

The idea of LNG on the East Coast making for a poor business case has been repeated by the federal government many times. However, in documents accessed by The Logic, it was revealed that Global Affairs Canada has, in fact, stated the opposite, and that there was great potential to increase rail and pipeline networks on the Atlantic.

Furthermore, Canada is capable of shipping LNG from the Western provinces to the East Coast because of our access to the vast pipeline networks of the United States.

As a result of these regrettable decisions, Canadians can only watch as lost opportunities to provide LNG to the democratic world are filled by other countries. Every downturn or disruption in the energy exports of other countries is a sore reminder of Canada’s lost opportunities.

Canada needs more vision, certainty, and drive when it comes to building the future of Canadian energy. In the words of Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Andrew Furey, “We will be all in on oil and gas for decades and decades to come…because the world needs us to be.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X