America, Congress, Attorney discussed on Lars Larson
Use of fossil fuels within twelve years. That is the goal. It's ambitious Aaron that possibly talking about everybody having to drive an electric cart. It's going to require a lot of rapid change that we don't even conceive as possible right now. That is Alex Andrea Cossio Cortes, the newest member of the United States Congress. Speaking to Anderson Cooper on sixty minutes with her idea that somehow we will transition entirely away from fossil fuels within the next dozen years or so by about twenty thirty welcome back to the LARs Larson show pleasure to be with you. And I'm glad to be able to talk about this with Terry. Jared who's an energy attorney and consultant and a former utility regulator, Missouri, Terry, I think that people who are watching that interview last night or watching the replay of today would have to be a little amused. If they know something about the subject the. Idea that this young lady who is a member of congress and has one vote out of four hundred and thirty five thinks that America can be taken off of fossil fuels. And I'm guessing by that she means all coal, which is over a quarter of our electric grid and all of the fossil fuels that constitute personal transportation. And also an awful lot of most of the transportation of goods and services within a dozen years. Welcome to the program, by the way. Good to be with you. Yes. It is. It is quite it. Just takes your breath away. When you think about these fast and just total? Change to our economy that this would take if we were even able to do it again doing away with all fossil fuels fuels throughout the Electric Industry. Transportation agriculture. It would just it would it would completely change our economic. System cost. Tens hundreds of trillions of dollars to make such a transition. And really, it's not even sees feasible from a practical standpoint, the technology just isn't there to allow this to happen? Anyway, I mean, just put it in context. I think we're a little over a million automobiles that are electric right now. And of course, as I said about a quarter of the electric energy in this country comes from coal. So those a lot of those electric cars are actually coal-fired cars. It's just the coal is burned somewhere else. And the electricity is sent two words put into the electric car and used for fuel of the other two hundred forty nine million or so personal transportation vehicles. Virtually all of them run on some kind of of fossil fuel either natural gas propane gasoline or diesel oil. I would think that even if you dedicated the entire federal budget of four trillion. Dollars a year. You couldn't switch over to personal transportation or transportation of goods around this country by changing all the all of the fossil fuel powered vehicles, including locomotives and long haul trucks. Even if you put every dime. We've got into it could you? Well, that's exactly right in twelve years. It just couldn't happen. You know, when you think about you think about the farmers every tractor in America. You would have to be scrapped. And you have to buy new combines new tractors new farm equipment. I mean, it it is so pervasive in our in our economy in the way, we we produce goods, we produce services that I it just simply again, the the cost which is be so prohibitive, and you know, they're the reason they want to do this, of course, is because of climate change. And and you know, it's supposed to be the big issue of our time to these environmental left, folks. But even if we were able to do this it's not going to put a tent in any sort of global warming or climate change because you know, China in India continued to increase their use of fossil fuels to power their economy and their increases with more than offset any reductions that we would have three this green energy plan. I'm talking to cherry Jared who's in? Energy attorney and consultant and a former utility regularly from Missouri. So how should we take this? You know, this challenge from a Cossio Cortez's newest member of congress is a just a sort of a form of political hyperbole where you overstate what we might be able to do and shoot for the moon, and then come up somewhat short, or is it just incredible naievety or or simply being informed on her part. And do you think other members of her party on Capitol Hill are going to call her on this and say, no that isn't even possible? Right. Well, I think it's a little bit of both. But you know, there there are lots of folks who believe like she does a lot of the younger millennials really do believe that we can get to a hundred percent renewable and kick completely away from fossil fuels in a short short amount of time. And they really don't care how much it costs because it's really not about reliable and affordable energy for us. It's it's about their agenda to do away with fossil fuels. They want to do away with nuclear to. You know, LARs, I if he were really interested in going to zero carbon emissions, you would think nuclear would be very very important, probably the Lynch pin of that. But they don't want that either. So it really is more of a political agenda for them than it is an energy. I mean because to some extent if they want to be taken seriously. About these kinds of proposals. This seems to be exactly the wrong thing to do to come out and make proposals that are so absurd that that we can just very easily say you can't possibly get it done. There's no way. Right. And and again, I think it's a political agendas. They they sort of fire people up that believe like, they do, and it gets them to of course, to contribute to the political causes that promote this kind of stuff. It really is about everything except reliable and affordable energy while the other thing is on the economic side of this. You're an attorney and a consultant but a regulator, but you understand what supply and demand. Does let's say you could somehow have a moonshot program and convert every diesel locomotive every long haul truck every personal transportation car produced twenty million of the year for the next twenty well even ten years and replace most of them when America stops if America were to somehow magically stopped consuming fossil fuels they'd still be put into the marketplace. Wouldn't they would there be demand for us to then export them everywhere else on the planet, and they'd get burned? Anyway. Yes. Absolutely. As I said, you know, China India other parts of the developing world or coin to continue to use fossil fuels because they're cheap reliable affordable. And you know, they're trying to grow their economies for some reason. These folks want to cripple our economy one. What would it do to us? If we were to back off this relatively cheap relatively affordable fossil fuel energy that currently runs our economy and start using something that would have to be much more expensive. If not if for no other reason than the fact that it's brand new. Right. Well, of course, it's going to mean, you know, jobs are going to go away because manufacturing is going to go over where they can get get cheap power and reliable tower, which means overseas. For for people to try to heat their homes in those types of things. It's going to be devastating. You're not going to be able to afford your bills. It's going to be pervasive. In our economy. Prices are gonna go up goods aren't going to be able to be purchased. It's going to be a mess. Terry. Thank you so much. What you do? And we appreciate you taking a few minutes with me tonight. You bet LARs always good to talk to you. Glad to have you with me, by the way. If you don't want to jump into the best conversation and talk journalism. It's right here. Every night at eight six six, hey, LARs that's eight six six four three nine five to seven seven emails to talk at LARs Larson dot com. Well, the Democrats stormed into the house of representatives brand new in control of the Democrats and cranked out a spending Bill the denies America. It's southern border wall. But why did some Republicans give that build their stamp of approval? I'm gonna.