Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Energy

Energy Effect: Trump’s big win fuels talk of policy actions

Published

7 minute read

From The Center Square

By

“Our long national nightmare with the Green New Deal is finally over because energy was on the ballot in 2024, and energy won”

Former President Donald Trump is on track to potentially receive 300 electoral votes or more. He won the national popular vote by about 5 million with votes still being counted. As a result, some analysts and Republicans say Trump and the GOP have a “mandate” to aggressively push forward with their agenda.

“America has given us an unprecedented and powerful mandate,” Trump said in his speech early Wednesday morning, creating a refrain echoed by his supporters.

As of midday Wednesday, Trump secured 292 electoral votes after Michigan and its 15 votes were called – 270 were needed to win the race. He also leads Vice President Kamala Harris in Alaska, Arizona and Nevada.

If Trump holds in those states, he will have 312 electoral votes, propelled in large part due to a level of support from Black voters and Hispanic voters unusual for a Republican.

“The American people have sent a clear message through President Trump’s resounding victory,” U.S. Sen. Thom Thillis, R-N.C., wrote on X. “The mandate is clear: fix the economy, secure the border, keep America safe, and confirm more judges who follow the Constitution.”

At the same time Wednesday, House Republicans had won 198 House racers and Democrats had won 177 with the rest uncalled; 218 are needed to win a majority. In the Senate, Republicans won 52 seats and Democrats won 42 with six still to be called, flipping the upper chamber to GOP control.

“This is a mandate,” Scott Jennings, an alum of the George W. Bush administration and CNN analyst said on the air as results came in early Wednesday morning.

“He won the national popular vote for the first time for a Republican since 2004,” Jennings said. “This is a big deal. This isn’t backing into the office. This is a mandate to do what you said you were going to do. Get the economy working again for regular, working class Americans. Fix immigration. Try to get crime under control. Try to reduce the chaos in the world. This is a mandate from the American people to do that.”

On economic policy, Trump is expected to double down on domestic oil drilling to increase revenue for the U.S. and lower energy costs for Americans. Trump made inflation a focus of his campaign, pledging to use domestic oil to get costs down for Americans and even pay off debt with the tax revenue.

“Our long national nightmare with the Green New Deal is finally over because energy was on the ballot in 2024, and energy won,” said Daniel Turner, founder and executive director of energy worker advocacy group Power The Future. “On day one, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris fired thousands of Keystone XL workers and thankfully starting in January it’s this administration that will be unemployed.”

Republicans have also vowed tax reform, something they prioritized after Trump came into office last time around. Experts said the market reacted favorably to Trump’s win.

“Trump’s election victory sparked a rally in the greenback last night as growth and inflation expectations rerated higher,” Adam Turnquist, chief technical strategist for LPL Financial in Charlotte, North Carolina, said in a statement. “Fed funds futures dialed back rate cut expectations from five to four 0.25% cuts by the end of next year. Yields surged higher, a move further exacerbated by deficit spending concerns, especially if Republicans secure the House.”

Trump also pledged to quickly negotiate an end the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, something that earned him bipartisan support from many Americans, including Arab and Muslim Americans frustrated by the Biden-Harris handling of the Israel-Hamas war.

Pop culture figure and Barstool Sports founder Dave Portnoy told his 3.3 million followers the win was a “ringing endorsement of Republicans” and “an indictment against the Democrats,” using a familiar message analysts across platforms online and on television.

That perception will be key for Republicans who likely have two years to push through a legislative agenda as reports indicate they will have a majority in the Senate and possibly the House.

Polls showed only 28% of Americans felt the country was headed in the right direction, something incumbent Harris could not overcome.

“I wanted Trump to win, but more than that, I wanted a decisive victory,” Newsweek Opinion Editor Batya Ungar-Sargon wrote on X. “If it’s true he’s won the popular vote, that is a mandate to lead. Calling Trump Hitler is now proven to be what it always was: an unforgivable smear of the majority of Americans. It’s time to embrace unity.”

While Harris delayed in recognizing Trump as the winner, still not conceding as of early Wednesday afternoon, his other fiercest opponents, like former U.S. Rep. Liz Cheney, recognized him on X but offered a warning.

“Our nation’s democratic system functioned last night and we have a new President-elect,” said Cheney, a Republican who campaigned with Democrat Harris on the trail. “All Americans are bound, whether we like the outcome or not, to accept the results of our elections. We now have a special responsibility, as citizens of the greatest nation on earth, to do everything we can to support and defend our Constitution, preserve the rule of law, and ensure that our institutions hold over these coming four years.”

2025 Federal Election

Canada Continues to Miss LNG Opportunities: Why the World Needs Our LNG – and We’re Not Ready

Published on

From EnergyNow.Ca

By Katarzyna (Kasha) Piquette, Founder and CEO, Canadian Energy Ventures

When Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, Europe’s energy system was thrown into chaos. Much of the 150 billion cubic meters of Russian gas that once flowed through pipelines had to be replaced—fast. Europe turned to every alternative it could find: restarting coal and nuclear plants, accelerating wind and solar approvals, and most notably, launching a historic buildout of LNG import capacity.

Today, LNG terminals are built around the world. The ‘business case’ is solid. The ships are sailing. The demand is real. But where is Canada?

As of March 28, 2025, natural gas prices tell a story of extreme imbalance. While Europe and Asia are paying around $13 per million BTU, prices at Alberta’s AECO hub remain below $2.20 CAD per gigajoule—a fraction of global market levels. This is more than a pricing mismatch. It’s a signal that Canada, a country rich in natural gas and global goodwill, is failing to connect the dots between energy security abroad and economic opportunity at home.

Since 2022, Europe has added over 80 billion cubic meters of LNG import capacity, with another 80 billion planned by 2030. This infrastructure didn’t appear overnight. It came from urgency, unity, and massive investment. And while Europe was preparing to receive, Canada has yet to build at scale to supply.

We have the resource. We have the relationships. What we lack is the infrastructure.

Estimates suggest that $55 to $75 billion in investment is needed to scale Canadian LNG capacity to match our potential as a global supplier. That includes pipelines, liquefaction terminals, and export facilities on both coasts. These aren’t just economic assets—they’re tools of diplomacy, climate alignment, and Indigenous partnership. A portion of this investment can and should be met through public-private partnerships, leveraging government policy and capital alongside private sector innovation and capacity.

Meanwhile, Germany continues to grapple with the complexities of energy dependence. In January 2025, German authorities seized the Panama-flagged tanker Eventin, suspected of being part of Russia’s “shadow fleet” used to circumvent oil sanctions. The vessel, carrying approximately 100,000 tons of Russian crude oil valued at €40 million, was found adrift off the Baltic Sea island of Rügen and subsequently detained. This incident underscores the ongoing challenges Europe faces in enforcing energy sanctions and highlights the pressing need for reliable, alternative energy sources like Canadian LNG.

What is often left out of the broader energy conversation is the staggering environmental cost of the war itself. According to the Initiative on GHG Accounting of War, the war in Ukraine has produced over 230 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent (MtCO₂e) since 2022—a volume comparable to the combined annual emissions of Austria, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia. These emissions come from military operations, destruction of infrastructure, fires, and the energy used to rebuild and support displaced populations. Yet these emissions are largely absent from official climate accounting, exposing a major blind spot in how we track and mitigate global emissions.

This is not just about dollars and molecules. This is about vision. Canada has an opportunity to offer democratic, transparent, and lower-emission energy to a world in flux. Canadian LNG can displace coal in Asia, reduce reliance on authoritarian suppliers in Europe, and provide real returns to our provinces and Indigenous communities. There is also growing potential for strategic energy cooperation between Canada, Poland, and Ukraine—linking Canadian LNG supply with European infrastructure and Ukrainian resilience, creating a transatlantic corridor for secure and democratic energy flows.

Moreover, LNG presents Canada with a concrete path to diversify its trade relationships, reducing overdependence on the U.S. market by opening new, high-value markets in Europe and Asia. This kind of energy diplomacy would not only strengthen Canada’s strategic position globally but also generate fiscal capacity to invest in national priorities—including increased defense spending to meet our NATO commitments.

Let’s be clear: LNG is not the endgame. Significant resources are being dedicated to building out nuclear capacity—particularly through Small Modular Reactors (SMRs)—alongside the rapid expansion of renewables and energy storage. But in the near term, LNG remains a vital bridge, especially when it’s sourced from a country committed to environmental responsibility, human rights, and the rule of law.

We are standing at the edge of a global shift. If we don’t step up, others will step in. The infrastructure gap is closing—but not in our favor.

Canada holds the key. The world is knocking. It’s time we opened the door.


Sources:

  • Natural Gas Prices by Region (March 28, 2025): Reuters
  • European LNG Import Capacity Additions: European Commission
  • German Seizure of Russian Shadow Fleet Tanker: Reuters
  • War Emissions Estimate (230 MtCO₂e): Planetary Security Initiative
Continue Reading

Energy

Trump Takes More Action To Get Government Out Of LNG’s Way

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By David Blackmon

The Trump administration moved this week to eliminate another Biden-era artificial roadblock to energy infrastructure development which is both unneeded and counterproductive to U.S. energy security.

In April 2023, Biden’s Department of Energy, under the hyper-politicized leadership of Secretary Jennifer Granholm, implemented a new policy requiring LNG projects to begin exports within seven years of receiving federal approval. Granholm somewhat hilariously claimed the policy was aimed at ensuring timely development and aligning with climate goals by preventing indefinite delays in energy projects that could impact emissions targets.

This claim was rendered incredibly specious just 8 months later, when Granholm aligned with then-President Joe Biden’s “pause” in permitting for new LNG projects due to absurd fears such exports might actually create higher emissions than coal-fired power plants. The draft study that served as the basis for the pause was thoroughly debunked within a few months, yet Granholm and the White House steadfastly maintained their ruse for a full year until Donald Trump took office on Jan. 20 and reversed Biden’s order.

Certainly, any company involved in the development of a major LNG export project wants to proceed to first cargoes as expeditiously as possible. After all, the sooner a project starts generating revenues, the more rapid the payout becomes, and the higher the returns on investments. That’s the whole goal of entering this high-growth industry. Just as obviously, unforeseen delays in the development process can lead to big cost overruns that are the bane of any major infrastructure project.

On the other hand, these are highly complex, capital-intensive projects that are subject to all sorts of delay factors. As developers experienced in recent years, disruptions in supply chains caused by factors related to the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in major delays and cost overruns in projects in every facet of the economy.

Developers in the LNG industry have argued that this arbitrary timeline was too restrictive, citing these and other factors that can extend beyond seven years. Trump, responding to these concerns and his campaign promises to bolster American energy dominance, moved swiftly to eliminate this requirement. On Tuesday, Reuters reported that the U.S. was set to rescind this policy, freeing LNG projects from the rigid timeline and potentially accelerating their completion.

This policy reversal could signal a broader approach to infrastructure under Trump. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, enacted in 2021, allocated $1.2 trillion to rebuild roads, bridges, broadband and other critical systems, with funds intended to be awarded over five years, though some projects naturally extend beyond that due to construction timelines. The seven-year LNG deadline was a specific energy-related constraint, but Trump’s administration has shown a willingness to pause or redirect Biden-era infrastructure funding more generally. For instance, Trump’s Jan.20 executive order, “Unleashing American Energy,” directed agencies to halt disbursements under the IIJA and IRA pending a 90-day review, raising questions about whether similar time-bound restrictions across infrastructure sectors might also be loosened or eliminated.

Critics argue that scrapping deadlines risks stalling projects indefinitely, undermining the urgency Biden sought to instill in modernizing U.S. infrastructure. Supporters argue that developers already have every profit-motivated incentive to proceed as rapidly as possible and see the elimination of this restriction as a pragmatic adjustment, allowing flexibility for states and private entities to navigate permitting, labor shortages and supply chain issues—challenges that have persisted into 2025.

For example, the $294 billion in unawarded IIJA funds, including $87.2 billion in competitive grants, now fall under Trump’s purview, and his more energy-focused administration could prioritize projects aligned with his energy and economic goals over Biden’s climate and DEI-focused initiatives.

Ultimately, Trump’s decision to end the seven-year LNG deadline exemplifies his intent to reshape infrastructure policy by prioritizing speed, flexibility and industry needs. Whether this extends formally to all U.S. infrastructure projects remains unclear, but seems likely given the Trump White House’s stated objectives and priorities.

This move also clearly aligns with the overall Trump philosophy of getting the government out of the way, allowing the markets to work and freeing the business community to restore American Energy Dominance in the most expeditious way possible.

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.

Continue Reading

Trending

X