tv Book Discussion on Fueling Freedom CSPAN August 1, 2016 9:31pm-10:46pm EDT
>> did you miss any of the republican or democratic conventions? now you can go back and watch every moment. go to c-span.org to find every speech rumble conventions. watch on-demand whenever you want. here's how. at the top of the c-span.org home page click on either the democratic or republican convention where you'll find videos from each day of both conventions. you'll find each day of both conventions. you'll find convention highlights near the top and scroll down and browse browse through. click on the speech you want to watch and you can clip any speech and share in social media or email. c-span.org is your competence of guide for finding video of any convention moment. c-span, created by cable, offered as a by cable, offered as a public service by your television provider. >> book tv continues next was stephen moore and kathleen white whose book, "fueling freedom" makes a case for using fossil fuels as an energy resource. after that a look at the energy crisis in the 19 seventies, meg meg jacobs writes about it in panic at the pump.
[inaudible] >> good afternoon and welcome to the heritage foundation. welcome for those who will be join us at book to be on a future occasion. we ask everyone in house to be courteous and check that you are mobile devices have been silenced or turned off. for those online or in the future you're welcome to send your questions or comments to us at any time email speaker at
heritage.org and will post today's program on the homepage for everyone's future reference. we're pleased to be cohosting this with our colleagues and allies at the texas public policy foundation which kathleen is a fellow. introducing our program energy centered gases mrs. dunlop as a conservative movement leader she serves as chairman of the conservative action project, leads heritage restore america project, advocates for american conservation ethics and advances energy and natural resources, and policy in general. she serves on board member for numerous public policy board members and organizations. she was heritage vice president for external relations, prior to joining us she served in the cabinet of governor george allen
as secretary of natural resources. she is is also held significant roles in the reagan administration as a deputy assistant to the president, presidential personnel and later on his special assistant and director of his office of cabinet affairs. she also served served as senior special assistant to general edward neese and particular to today's program as deputy undersecretary the department of the interior as well as the assistant secretary for fish, wildlife and parks. please join me in welcoming my collie, becky norton dunlap. let mac. >> thank you so much it is a pleasure to see all of you here today. this is an exciting day, it's always always exciting when good friends and great people turn out great books. we have one today that we are going to be introducing two. it is my pleasure to introduce both of our co-authors for today
and i'll introduce them both and asked them to come to the podium and make their remarks and will have time for questions. our verse co-authors kathleen white. she is a distinguished senior fellow resident and director of the armstrong center for energy and the environment at the texas public policy foundation. prior to going with the foundation she served a six-year term as chairman and commissioner of the texas commission on environmental quality. with with regulatory jurisdiction over air quality, water quality water rights and utility storage and disposal of waste, pc eq staff of 3000 with an annual budget of over 600,000,016 regional offices makes it the second-largest environmental regulatory agency in the world after the u.s. environmental protection agency. it is our goal in the not-too-distant future to make it the first largest in the
world prior to governor to the appointment of white in 2001, she served as then governor george bushes appointed to the texas water development board where she sat until appointed to the ceq. she also served on the texas economic development commission and the environmental flows study commission. she recently completed her term has an officer and director of the lower colorado river authority. she now sits on the editorial board of the journal of revelatory science, the texas emission reduction advisory board in the texas water foundation. her writing has appeared in numerous publications including national review investors business daily, washington examiner, and major texas newspapers. i might say parenthetically she is also a contributor contributor to the heritage foundation study, the
eight principles of the american conservation ethic which i hope you all have a copy of, it's good good reading before today's book's release. she most recently testified before the u.s. senate environment and public works committee. perhaps most important lead to me, she is a dear friend, long-standing we met when we are children in washington d.c. fighting for liberty, she continues to be a great warrior for liberty. our other co-author mr. stephen moore, everyone knows steve moore, he is a television star, we we see him a lot on television these days on the radio we like to listen to him, he formally wrote on the economy and public policy for the wall street journal and he is now a distinguished visiting fellow for the projects of economic growth here at the heritage foundation. it was a member of the journals editorial board and he returned to heritage in 2004 about 25
years after he first served here. >> 2014. >> it was 2014. about 25 years after his tenure with grover m herman fellow and budgetary fairs from 1984 until four until 1987. he also founded and served as president as the club for growth which raises money for political candidates who favor free market economic policies. he also founded the free enterprise fund before joining the wall street journal. over the years he has served as the senior economist at the congressional joint economic committee and as a senior economics fellow at the cato institute where he published dozens of studies on federal and state fiscal policy. it was also a consultant to the national economic commission in 1987 and research director for president direct reagan's
commission on privatization. he is a fax news contributor along with writing regularly for national review, forbes investor ms. business daily, the washington times and the orange county register. he holds a master of arts in economics from george mason university. he has offered numerous books including who is the fairest of them all, it's getting better all the time, still an open door and an inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of state. and today of course he releases a book which he is co-authored with kathleen white, "fueling freedom". exposing the mad war on energy. let's welcome to our podium our guest authors. [applause]. >> thank you becky. thank you you for the kind introduction and thank you for all the years you have been a mentor.
i also want to think a very patient man and he is the editor of our book, tom spence who is in the back, [applause]. his skill was extraordinary to see how you transformed and helps me find my voice was excellent. but his patients is to be a hallmark. the book many of you in this room know much about these issues, the book we hope is really for a general audience that i find dismally unaware of the magnitude of the issues we have going on right now. i call them forces not issues because we have two forces going on, occurring at the very same time in history, worth all are unprecedented. one is the shale revolution some people call it the
unconventional oil and gas revolution. i think many remain unaware of the magnitude of it and giving their precipitous and plunging prices that began in 2014 it got off the radar other than true reports of how many people are unemployed or how many rigs lost. but the opportunity that the shale revolution offers and the kind of revolution in the dynamic of the revolution is unprecedented. much of the book tries to reveal that. just an example, the revolution was not just another economic boom, it was on the basis of technological animation, access to what they just called the mother load of all hydrocarbons, they knew they were there when they were drilling and conventional vertical wells that allow them to extract maybe only 1% or maybe only 10% of the
actual resource trapped in shale. that is what what is accessible, whatever the price of oil is. that is what is now accessible. it was not a result of government plans or programs, or subsidy, and it was not the result of the global major oil companies, exxon duke nothing wrong with them, but this was an achievement of risk taking energy entrepreneurs, be a geologist or financiers that operated in competitive markets. enormous risk, enormous gains, thankfully we, thankfully we don't have a minister of oil in this country but i think for the first time in history we have a truly market generated energy revolution. its future remains uncertain, but the opportunities it provides is amazing. the book goes on in detail living in texas where the technology was first developed and utilized and is still the
state that was able to cut costs of hydraulic fracturing and increasing outputs. it's still going on, but i think were unaware of the opportunity that allows us, that is occurring because at the same time that a very powerful global crowd is determined to eliminate fossil fuels and natural gas. as fast as possible. they have done most regrettably a tragically good taste with coal. when has our government eliminated and i went out and go as far say eliminate but almost killed an entire industry. i am taken having been 30 years and more dealing with environmental issues that again, those that make decisions, the policymakers, the policymakers, those that get the public's attention in the media have
dismally unaware of the magnitude of climate policies. a lot of talk in the last couple of years about the greatest civilizational threat today which are pretty lofty terms of our president would enthusiastically conclude that it is so-called the man-made global warning. i would submit in the book tries to explain why in great detail that climate policies themselves would be the greatest threat to western civilization as we know it. we are a fossil fueled civilization. we use perhaps 200 more times energy that flow through our life and all kinds of goods and services than people did in 1800. some changes occurred since then lifespan is three times longer. average income per capita is ten
- 30 times higher. the population of the world is now about seven and half billion instead of 1 billion. things literally have gotten better in those indeed are at risk. some people call the great fact of history, we kinda forget the somewhat dreary economic time in which we live is the unprecedented scale of modern economic growth. our book summits that energy do not cost that, fossil fuels were first methodically applied in the industrial revolution, colby in the first hydrocarbon resource to be so widely used and converted and it seems like in a countless number of created technologies. but never before had a middle-class emerge, the productivity made possible by fossil fuel energies, just change the dynamic. productivity productivity increase of much that the price a good spell,
those who made the goods could in fact a for them. but most and partly a middle-class simultaneously was the emergence of liberal democracies and i hope this group knows i don't mean left leaning. that combination of property rights of the inalienable rights that our declaration of independence attributes to each human being the emergence of our more competitive markets than had emerge before buttressed by the incredible val a fossil fuel change the world. a couple examples and i think it's worthy reminding of how far we have come. in 19 hundreds the average workweek was 72 hours. can you imagine, can you imagine, and you did not come home to a meal ready in your house, you began just trying to
provide basic assistance. 12 hours a day six days a week. we all know what it is now it's a 40 or weak. but that's amazing. the u.s. amazing. the u.s. has long been known for having by far the high standard of living but what does that mean, in 1875 the average family in the world to include in the united states spent 74% of its income for just basic needs, food, clothing, shelter. in 1995 they spent 13 percent. 95 they spent 13%. those are precious achievements. we have indicators in the book gets into this and see me talk about it we have a flagging middle-class, reduced income, we do not have good signals about the continued growth of a robust middle-class. climate policy, i feel and when
the media ever talks about something other than the candidates personalities are the most recent insult, we really need to lift up the really major issues, the major policy decisions that the next president next congress will make, there is no mention, the candidates all have their written energy policies you can find on their websites and perhaps have given a few speeches in the issue goes to the background. where economic growth is talked about there's always a missing factor which often has to do with what kind of energy availability would we have. renewables have been aside a job they cannot complete. all climate policies assume that we can fairly well replace all fossil fuels with current technologies of renewable energy. if if you want the book goes on in this in great detail but there's a section where number of headlines for european
papers that talk about the fatal blunder with ugly consequences, how electricity electricity became in a luxury good, and germany the retail electric rates are three times higher than they are in the united states. the economic impact studies of these policies are met all the really big variables, what it would cost to replace the infrastructure from extraction to production to delivery or distribution, highly regarded number cruncher say may be eight --dash $10 trillion just so you could possibly replace significant shares of fossil fuels is also in the trillions. this, the global economy would take on, this is what our country would take on when we have such a need a more vibrant
economic growth. there is so much opportunity. i will close by saying being an environmental regulator glad like to call myself a reagan republican from a very early age, my parents give me no choice. but it's also missing an agreement and energy policy, for an environmental policy, it's not about the climate policies are not about genuine protection of the environment there about energy. appear propaganda that comes out of epa now is unbelievable. citizens deserve to rely on some basic assessment of health risk and things like that, epa is so far out of the way, we have learned and in the last 20 or or 30 years we have had dramatic
reduction of what i call genuine pollutants, those listed in the clean air act that can genuinely impact human health. we've had falls of 60 or 80%, the aggregate omissions that come out of our tailpipes is now 90% less than it was a 1960. i'm old enough to know that you could always see the exhaust of your tailpipe, if you, if you notice even concentrated cities like this you don't see it. we have learned how to operate and produce with great environmental sensitivity. we have been prosperous enough to absorb the extra costs. environmental enhancement should go on by carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. it is a gas of life. we're educating whole generations now that think and evidently agree with former secretary of state john kerry that carbon is among the worst weapons of mass destruction. were in trouble because our bones and blood are made out of carbon.
but that i think is an important insight. there is a very dark side to climate policy and you need to look no further than the words of global and national leaders that it's as if we are reformulating this really pessimistic, people use the word anti-humanity people, people who believe that the enemy of humanity is man rather than people with taste and the creativity of the human mind and in what the dynamic of freedom means, you do not find breakthrough innovations in highly authoritarian countries. so i think this is in many ways a moral issue. billions in the world live without electricity, i mean we cannot imagine what it is to live without. any hope for economic growth for health, educion, of those that still
lack access of electricity, they they don't need solar panel, they need energy, efficient sources that are controlled by incredibly effective technology. so it's an odd collision, our candidates if you'd like to go to their websites and read their energy policies, they offer dramatic alternatives, but it's a pleasure to be here, get i think becky, i think tom and thank you steve. we you steve. we really hope that we can get this book out to many, many people. i think people have an open mind who are unaware of the magnitude of the risk we are taking on with climate policies and the magnitude of the opportunities that it gives to this united states is the largest producer of oil, natural gas, and coal. thank you [applause].
>> i think i'm going to sit because i have slides i want to show too. becky thank you very much for the nice introduction. i see a lot of friends here, and many of the scholars at heritage and elsewhere, thank you for coming. images start by saying that when kathleen really was the inspiration for this book she had written a long paper for the texas public policy foundation on the moral case for fossil fuels. as soon as i saw this as thought this is really the essence of the argument that we always make the economic argument and sometimes a strategic argument that this idea that using fossil fuels is a moral thing to do not in a moral thing to do. let me give you a couple of examples of what were talking about. we open up the book with a story about something that happened to me personally which is about four or five years ago a single is almost exactly four or five years ago today that we have one
of these huge storms in virginia, big summer storm that came on with massive winds, not down thousands of trees in the area. we live in an area where we just had huge power outage. the power outages lasted for about three or four days before they could restore the power. i tell tell the story about how at that time my sons were teenagers and i have three sons, two teenagers who i don't like very much an 11-year-old from still very fond of. at the time this was, cool this was, cool we had flashlights and use candles and so on. for about the first three or four hours it was a neat experience to live without electricity but then was so interesting to see how things to do with them because guess what, they couldn't use their ipods and they could use their ipads and their game boys and watch tv and they can get netflix and all
of these things that millennial's have become accustomed to. after about literally 48 hours alike oh my oh my god people live lives without electricity. it is something we take for granted because we have eyes lived with electric power. it was just a given in our lives. it hasn't been for many centuries before the advent of fossil fuels. i give a lot of talks on high school and college campuses and i talk about energy a lot. one question i always ask his what your generation i see a lot of millennial's your generation thinks it's cool to be green. it's a cultural thing. let's go green let's get our electricity from windmills and solar power. so i always asked these kids where do you get your electricity from and i always get the same answer, will the that outlet there comes out of the outlet in the wall, most
americans have no idea where they get electricity from. most of them dough. was number the number one source of electricity in america today? actually natural gas and coal are about even. about 35% or so, 35 and 4040% comes from : 35 or 40% come from natural gas and coal. kathleen was entered inspiration for the book and what she wrote was so great was about the industrial revolution and how it's not understood that the industrial revolution, we all know the industrial revolution was the first leap forward in terms of living standards is the age of machinery, automobiles, steam engines, modern manufacturing and so on but when kathleen points out is what is not told in the history book is
a story of the industrial revolution is a story of fossil fuels that we stopped using things like would and windmills and we started really using really efficient forms of power production which came from coal. when when people say we should shut down the coal industry just one sentence which you are saying, this country was built on coal. and we have 500 years of it and we should be using it. but i'm an economist, i'm not an energy expert way kathleen is. however talk about the economic opportunity we have as a nation with this issue because of the fossil fuel revolution in the shale oil and gas which is change the world in a dramatic way. let me show you a couple of charts. we'll start this. if you want to start and see why electricity matters i just love this photograph. what you're looking at is the black areas north korea at night
in the bottom area south korea at night. you can see the lights. north korea lacks many thing but what they lack fundamentally as without economic freedom is no electric power. there is no lights in north korea at night south korea is lit up. south korea has a living standard that is six times higher than north korea and electric power as a springboard to economic improvement. now this is an interesting one. this deals with the issue of emissions that you're talking about. i love this one. if you look at the natural gas revolution as we look to the future to me the future as natural gas. it's a true wonder fuel. it's made in america, is cheap, it's abundant and is cleanburning. why would we want to use it we
should use as much of it as we can is by far the most clean source of electric power we can have. . . they are just against industrialization. they do want to slow down the economy in the pay some kind of premise. this just shows we are an incredibly energy efficient economy. the left keeps talking about making the left more efficient and we are.
this is just natural progress. we produce more work because of services with less energy. we don't need the government to tell us that our mandate. it's the course of history. this is one of the charges that the left is making that the methane missions are out of control. methane emissions have fallen even as we have used more natural gas. this is another important point. i think most americans don't really understand this but my goodness, barack obama doesn't understand this. if you listen to what he was saying through his first term in office, he said we have to move to green energy because we are running out of fossil fuels. i remember one of the famous quotes said we are running out
of it so fast pretty soon we have to throw down the washington monument because that's the only place. it's doubled and tripled overnight. one technology has doubled and tripled the amount we have so we are not running out of oil or gas and certainly not running out of cool. one of the themes of the book is promoting energy resources that we have such a super abundance of and i make the case we have more audio from the gas and coal than any other place in the world that we can create a sanctuary of the united states or saudi arabia of the 21st century and that has profound impacts for the economy i will get to that in a moment. the will spill is another example how we are cleaning up even as we use more energy. this is kind of an interesting
one of what happened. i made the point how he doubled and tripled the amount of oil that we have. by the way, these come right from the book. look at what happened around 2005 or 06, 07. we more than doubled overnight the amount of energy reserves we have. by the way, they keep going up over time. again, we are not running out of this stuff. this is kind of a fun one. you just look at the state law has a big impact in terms of where we produce energy. so i'm using california and texas in terms of the way they view energy. the amount was estimated to have enough oil and gas as the whole state of texas. it's the most oil-rich place as
well. look at the difference between the production of oil and gas in texas versus california and i would submit this is almost attributable to the environmental regulations where california has the resources they just decided as a matter of course not to use them. when i did these people on the left they say they have all this oil. by the way, north dakota just recently passed california as a producer of oil so they are going the wrong direction. if you follow the crisis in california, the same kind of water policies that are in place are the same kind of policies they have with respect to oil. this made the point about the fact that we are cleaning up the environment. the amount of emissions from coal plants in terms of the major pollutants that we look at, whether it is led or sulfur
or carbon monoxide i think people get mixed up. carbon monoxide is a pollution. you can die from carbon and oxide, carbon dioxide is not a pollution. in some cases i thin think why s that 70 or 90% from what it was in the -- it's certainly attributable that there is a difference between smart regulations and not smart regulations. we have hundreds and hundreds of years with existing technologies and the technology is getting better all the time so let me summarize by saying it's an economic strategy. why does this issue matters so much in terms of america's economic future and not just energy future? use all the jobs report that came out that it's growing at an abysmally small break. rate. i estimate over the next months it's growing at one to 1.5%.
it's not going to provide enough jobs. you're not going to provide enough tax revenues or new businesses at 1.5%. we have to grow faster. economists are asking now how do we get back to the 4% with ronald reagan and george kenne kennedy. one of the big answers that i don'but idon't think enough of e politicians are paying attention to is this incredible opportunity with energy and to put it simply, this i used to say three or four years ago has become a conventional wisdom and his true. we use everything w we got and within the united states of america the first time in a half-century will be energy independent. john f. kennedy said we are goinweregoing to make america ey independent.
i'm not just talking about the united states but canada, new mexico could be producing more energy than we are buying the rest of the world. i estimate that if we were to produce the energy that we have come of the oil, gas and coal, nuclear power as well we are for whatever works and whatever is cost efficient. if we use those resources, we estimate that we are going to start selling those abroad. we should be selling the natural gas rates now. we are producing more than we use we just don't have the infrastructure in place to get it where it needs to be. when hillary clinton and bernie sanders talked about infrastructure i say absolutely. what we really need a vitally needed pipelines and lng terminals and refineries and the kind of energy once we get that in place.
think about who the losers are if we do this, think about the national security implications if we start selling energy rather than buying it. we spend in the neighborhood of $200 billion a year importing energy from other places and some of it comes from mexico and from countries that hate us and are trying to kill us and countries like iran and saudi arabia, venezuela and i know that isis is almost completely funded with petrodollars. it'll make a game changer in the middle east politics. the other point is what this means for the economy i estimate we could increase the growth rate by one percentage point a year that's using the wailing and gas and by the way, 1% might
not seem like a very big deal but that is an increase per year that's gigantic. by the way, we go from 2% growth to 3% growth and if we put on top of that three to four it's not that hard to get them back in a very rapid growth policy. all we have to do is use the resources and open up to questions. is this issue about global warming and not using fossil fuels because of the death of the planet and i could simply sesay this. it's clear in terms of an election issue but americans have said the last two or three years. there's no outliers. what is the issue americans care most about the jobs, the economy and terrorism. what's interesting is if you
actually look down at the polls that are done by gallup or fox or abc news they do these all-time. what are your major concerns usually there were 25. guess what global concern is, 23, 24, 25. as a matter of good politics republicans should be talking about developing the resources. we won't have any global warming policy very simple and this idea that we are going to agree to this treaty donald trump is right about this. china and india, one last statistic, as we sit here in the next two years are expected to go 500.
every time we shut down coal plants china and india build them. all we are doing is exporting jobs in the united states and making the planet dirtier because we are substituting clean cold in the united states with these other countries and china .-full-stodie .-full-stop. thank you for being here. [applause] thank you very much. we want to open up to questions. we have microphones in the room. one of the 3% of people who's concerned about the change [inaudible] [laughter] we have a microphone here. if you wait for the microphone and then introduce your self we will start right back here in the center.
>> [inaudible] reading the war against energy is none other than the environmental protection agency currently guided by political appointees of the obama administration. there has been some discussion some time about devolving that responsibility as carried out to the states abolishing the epa over the period of three years and involving the responsibilities to the states, something which from the administrative standpoint is a lot easier than some people realize because it wasn't by congress that was in the 1970s but we could also be done away with.
as someone who headed the state environmental agency, what would you think of this idea, is this something realistic? do you think it can be done, we appreciate your comments. >> most enthusiastically i think it is the best solution and can be done because i notice from texas to major job in the agency in the state is implementing the rules but with one deciding what are the standards that drive the rules and try to dictate how we are supposed to do it is something that you would have the states think they didn't have the resources or all that but i think it's an excellent solution and you would be apt to get more robust science although some say we can't leave that to
the states it has to be national because states closer to ground zero if you will to what is really going on in the state in terms of aer quality and water quality know the resources and the people involved in creating the pollution and trying to solve it. i think that's an excellent idea. a couple quick comments. how right you are about the unbelievable road to quality these days. i was just thinking it's been dying years now, how long? against the will of congress carbon dioxide as a pollutant and that's where all of this has come from. it's appalling that wasn't a decision of the congress if it
was most considered the senate declined and there were other locations where it's unbelievable they could change the country. >> in texas i remember rick. he was saying the statistics how much they reduced beyond the national standards so it felt like a good example. >> that generate a lot of revenues and becky achieved the same thing when she was in virginia in the houston area it was the most ballooning city. we developed a plan while i was
there we have t had to fight tod nail every day because you have to take a worst-case scenario to achieve the standard it's kind of sick when something like that gives you the chills. we did it. then of course immediately. i'm not an expert on the wall that i was doing some research on this and it says the standards have to be the industry has a chance of meeting it appears intentionally so that the coal industry -- >> we have a gentleman over he
here. >> has a co- inheritor in upstate new york we get the 250-foot water while whenever we turn on the faucet natural gas comes out and i was just wondering what is the likelihood of pressures and the economic pressures that someday i would be rich and have my own island because i'm sitting at 290 acr 290 acres. the politicians are listening and do you see the likelihood
that will be allowed. >> i understand it wasn't reflecting the preference of those that live where the resource is and that is an urban concerned but to me sometimes it is nice to have a state fight and take on the government. but it's the hydraulically fractured wells that are going down the mile. >> how many of you have seen that video from the gas lands
where west virginia for the lightlight near the water and it looks like -- i'm sure you've seen that. i went to give a talk about energy policy and i was talking to th the books and imagine that the gas lines people burst out laughing. this has been happening for 75 years in west virginia. there were stories where they would come back from the bar and there was so much methane and the point is that it's not it's natural as you are describing it seeps out. so that being the case, how do you prevent it from getting in the drinking water, you actually drill it out and then it is less
likely to contaminate. the epa, correct me if i'm wrong was it about a year or so ago they said that there were no findings. i've got to say this is an amazing thing. i gave a talk two years ago to the high school valedictorians and they were incredibly impressive and bright and smart and inquisitive and so on. i remember during my talk to them i gave two or three minutes about this and how great it is and i remember they started to follow. how many in the room think fracking is a good thing? twelve raised their hands. how many think it's a bad thing? thirty raised their hand.
you'd think it is the cure for cancer. it's one of the seismic technological breakthroughs and the rest of the world. these kids have been indoctrinated the high school classes as a bad thing. there's this wacko propaganda campaign that infiltrates every area in the culture. >> right here in the middle. >> i'm actually from west virginia. my question just so i can i guess in the 520 years in the future of coal just geographically where do you see that taking place?
spinnakers to problems. two problems. one is that natural gas is cheap and we believe in is pre- marketeers that creative destruction if something comes along that's better, then use it. we should be using coal as it is a great way to get electricity but that's not to say there's a huge technologthere is ahuge ten nuclear energy. it's a microprocessor or not the big nuclear reactors but smaller ones that provide enough electricity for a small town or neighborhood or something like that. so i guess we are for whatever works and whatever makes sense.
>> the coal issue and the attack on cole isn't anything congress passed. in the series of rules again as i set up of carbon dioxide, decisions of that kind of consequence where you eliminate all kinds of jobs i'm making a decision has to be the decision of the congress, and i think that's possiblit's possible to a matter of fact. i think a lot of people if the people really understand the west virginia example of what has rapidly harmed the state.
i know we have a c-span audience here. if you are giving money to the sierra club it's basically giving a big victory dance and every time it closes down the celebrated and what's interesting. they say they are now going to do to the industry what they've done to coal and they mean it. they want to go somewhere between two to 4% the comments are worth making in the buck and those that are very worried about the threat of global
warming, physicists and engineers who see this as a matter of physics and possibility for intermittent sources like wind and solar to not only meet the demand that you know how many tons of concrete and steel are angering each of those turbans and how many million acres they are already on i its ear if we are e magnitude we are taking on? google launched an effort they were going to come up with the planned launch fossil fuels that would work on reminding the renewables and it was cheaper than coal after several years those that call themselves stalwart environmentalists said this doesn't work. the amount of materials used to
put that much across the board would have far more environmental impact than not bill gates have invested heavily in increasing wind and solar installations and he also reached the same conclusion. it's investing in the breakthrough technology which is the way to go. next question, while we are waiting to go to the gentle mann in the back let me ask a quick question here you will get the microphone back to him. >> where in north america do you see the coal industry? >> its west virginia, north dakota. i live in virginia that the coal
producing state. think about the states to produce coal, indiana, pennsylvania, ohio. this is why it's a very strong political issue for donald trump who is very pro- fossil fuel development. i don't think there's any other state that's more reliant although i may be wrong on that. >> the regulatory structures are affecting the states. >> let me wait one moment here and ask about the issue in public land. we have this in the senate and the house but are advocating more federal land and water conservation fund fully funded by land how much of this
fracking is going on? >> we have a chapter on what would happen if we went all in if he is the strategy to get all we want to become energy independent and we estimate on all federal lands in federal water we are sitting on with the college treasure chest of $50 trillion worth of assets. obama just recently suspended the leases for coal. we are not talking about a national treasures are environmentally important federal lands. not only could we get $50 trillion increase over the next 30 or 40 years.
in the crony capitalism we are talking about the fossil fuels in the capitalism for the alternative energy sector. i wonder if you have any insights to share with us about that to reiterate what we said as far as getting into that yes we do. without the subsidies and loan guarantees and outright grants in the federal treasury and all kinds of guaranteed contracts, we wouldn't have the renewable installations going on at the speed at which they are now. and the great contrast to that,
how many people know this for a fact, how many know that 95% of all of the oil and natural gas produced in small and medium independent company is not the global majors. it's a very different economic dynamic i find refreshing and it's so classically expressed in texas. there are remarkably generous. the magnitudes of all we need is to look across the pond as they say in dc. they see howe see how the subsis because if we have the renewables only now provided.
though subsidies just ballooned. >> one of my favorite new yorker cartoons there is a giant fan blowing into windmills and it's amazing to me it's the best statistic over the last ten years of what we've spent on the subsidies that almost all have gone to wind and solar and others have gone to the renewable fuels like ethanol. that's a lot of money, $150 billion. we had a debate last year that republicans made a big mistake in their spending bill the renewable subsidies.
their livelihoods truly depend on what the association does if you don't renew these tax credits we are going out of business. what if they can't survive without federal subsidies? meanwhile the oil and gas industry for all the talk not paying their fair share of tax than there are more giveaways to the gas industry i'm not an expert on that. they ought to use what works, let's just -- my regulation is let's shut down the department of energy. the lady right there in the front row in the back section.
the success the fossil fuel industry has had, you mentioned of natural gas and coal. would you say we are going to drill more. it's the new development before most of them victims of their own success. so it's an amazing story. from the 2007 through 2012 the amount over a five-year period we doubled the production in
this revolution that happened all of the new jobs and increase over barack obama's first term were all attributable to the oil and gas industry so when i give talks i said congratulations you are the people reelected and they didn't like that. much but it's true without the oil and gas revolution they wouldn't have been reelected. this is the whole industry it goes through these boom and bust cycles and overall the price has gone from 30 to $50. kathleen is more of an expert but when i talk to these folks they say the price is 50 to 60 we start making 70 as high up to
110. these inventions, horizontal throwing and fracking they were all made in the united states had done by these not exxon and chevron but the small entrepreneurial gas business that figured out how to crack the code. it's not as if it was all this oil and gas it's to figure out how to get at this stuff. oil and gas will keep getting cheaper and able to make money.
by the way, when you made this point about why you said we keep making these bets on renewable energy if we go back to the 70s remember of these people say look at the technological progress that will happen with solar and wind but they never take into account they are getting better but they do so they were thinking the price of oil would be $50 they thought it would be $200 a barrel. that's why they keep losing more and more money. it's a vicious cycle we should get rid of. my point is yes we are going to come back and very soon. >> because i'm from texas and i can't resist i don't consider it a bust. it's a different type of boom.
it had some of the earth stand uworst andthen they became fulld with all the bells and whistles and terrorists. we were adopting a policy to end our addiction to foreign oil. the folly of this and the energy policy. i think that -- and i think that you implied this but the boom and bust cycles are the small whaling to gas people know about. what you had going i think has been missed by what i considered thconsiderthe most intelligent y media coverage is a. in 2015, we increased production
in the 15 million barrels and they are not a good indication to me of the oriole productivity. you have a few that were much more productive and operated by people who had some cost-cutting things. geology is different and all of that. the same ones that offered a three or four years ago say that would be impossible but they figured out how to reduce the production so i like to say we have had a little more between the ascendant power in the united states and i would say we one. >> we have some folks out here
for sale. if one of the challenges you have is the lack of knowledge by the citizens and students and young americans about energy in general. tell us a little bit about your book is aimed to. what is the youngest student that can read your book and comprehend and what is the plan to get this into the hands of people so they will have knowledge? >> this isn't for energy experts. my big worry is that people are not clean to realize what it is until it's too late and we've shut down the oil and gas and coal industry. that will have catastrophic effects. i was making light of people not having access to their game boys and so on.
you can't operate anything if you have blackouts. i wish they would hit people on the head and say that what you're talking about this isn't a feasible alternative we ought to use it and we want this in schools. >> middle school, high school, grade school. >> the energy industry the biggest of the smallest independent in all the service industries and financial that surround have been apologetic about this for decades. i think it's unbiased british petroleum decided to call themselves beyond petroleum because they were going to keep drilling for oil and get into the renewable business as well which didn't last long but i
think it's important to get into the hands there are organizations and the international association that find themselves across the country on the local level first with people that know the energy business and their livelihoods surrounded i think they need and deserve that kind of information to tell their story. then in the localities people at the local level and city government the councils that don't understand what opportunity we have and also what propaganda we are feeding our children and policymakers about the environmental energy threats. so the bottom line is if you love liberty and economic growth, people need to read this book to figure out how to have both. >> where is tom, the editor you
the prime minister of singapore is in the u.s. this week for an official visit that includes meetings with president obama and members of his cabinet as well as a state dinner in his honor. at the white house will hold a ceremony for the feminist or tomorrow in the south on. watch as the minister takes questions from reporters at the joint news conference live at 11:40 a.m. on c-span.
the state allegiance went as far back in generations as there were settlers in the country and i think one has to keep that in mind i'm not belittling it but you can explain the actions of good decent men like robert e. lee and stonewall jackson they fight because virginia needs them. >> sunday at eight eastern on q-and-a. booktv continues with meg jacobs whose book takes a look at the energy crisis of the 1970s.