Trump and Energy Policy

Readers here will know that this site is not normally a political forum, and I don’t intend to change the policy of discouraging political arguments, but I think when politics intersects with energy issues (the focus of the site); it is on-topic for ECW, so long as we don’t stray into heated arguments (off-topic).

The world’s attention today is on the victory of Donald Trump in the US election, and I am sure like me, readers here are wondering what his presidency might mean for energy policy, particularly if commercial LENR makes his debut during his administration. Trump did mention energy during the campaign, particularly in connection with American economic growth, energy security and jobs. Here’s a page from his website on his energy policy plans: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/energy

From that list we can see that he is committed to using fossil fuels for economic and national security purposes America, and there’s no specific mention of promoting of alternatives like wind or solar — and there’s no mention of nuclear, nor anything about policies to mitigate climate change. In fact, Trump has vowed to cancel billions of dollars in ‘climate change spending’.

The Obama administration has had a strong commitment to developing alternative energy sources, and some have hoped that this would include support for LENR if it were viable.

So this makes me wonder how he might deal with LENR, if it comes along in a commercial way. One of his campaign themes has been reduce regulations which he says stifles business, and to promote free enterprise. Would he stand in the way if a world changing new energy source like the E-Cat came along that could jeopardize the US fossil fuel energy industry?

Andrea Rossi operates from the US, and I am sure will be hopeful that his work will be able to flourish here. He commented today in response to a question about the election result: “The Great People of the United States has talked, sound and clear. This means that Donald Trump is the best possible choice. I appreciated also the open mind of Hillary Clinton after her defeat.”

  • sam
  • sam

    I found an interesting article via Newsfusion Science News – I thought you might like it:
    http://go.newsfusion.com/science-news/item/4574166

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Mr. Calder: I have viewed all of the above sites you have said validates your above quotes. None of them validates your quotes with the possible exception of the firing of one Nicholas Drapela. Even this firing has a highly questionable connection to climate change: http://davidappell.blogspot.com/2012/06/osu-instructor-dismissed-justifiably.html

    Therefore I have concluded you are wasting my time.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    An honest demagogue and a megalomaniac? God has decided to produce the ultimate Reality Show (The Appentice)

  • http://lenrftw.net LENR G

    Well, health care is a complex topic.

    I would just say a couple of things.

    Evidence from around the world indicates that our current way of doing it costs way more and gets worse results — and most of the comparison countries have adopted a system with an even heavier government role then we have.

    Second, that as a progressive I want to live in a society that takes care of those who fall seriously ill… and I want it to be affordable… and I would like to see it decoupled from small businesses (if not all businesses) so that Americans had more economic freedom to start businesses and not have to worry about the risks on one side and any onerous paperwork and regulations on the other.

    • bachcole

      First off, with regard to health and health care, I am the teacher and you are the student. This is certainly not the case in most other departments of life, but it is in the case of health. I have real results with CURING supposedly incurable diseases, and we both have sweet and caring theories and intentions about health care.

      However, it is only my bitterness that causes me to not want to take care of those who participated in and enthusiastically supported a system that did everything to discourage and discredit me and what I was doing for the past 46 years, but now they want my sympathetic tax dollars to continue paying for their increasingly expensive “health care” until the grave relieves me of this burden. In fact, I guarantee that many of those self-same people who want my tax dollars now castigated me and my wife for being “health-nuts” and insisted upon organic and nutrient dense foods.

      The USA spends 2 or 3 times more on so-called healthcare as any other industrialized nation on Earth, and yet our longevity and infant mortality is worse than even Portugal and Greece, the worst of all the industrialized nations. We are like 25th in both categories. It is probable that you are counting the government spending only, and I am counting all spending. If those other countries have fully socialized medicine, then their governmental spending is going to be greater. Believe it or not, I like the single payer system; it would be better than the present Kafka-esque monstrosity that we currently have. In doctor’s offices, more people push paper than do any “healing”, which is really just symptom removal most of the time.

      But the problem with the single payer idea is that the ph[‘]cking reductionistic, materialistic, pharmaceutical shills (doctors) are still in power. Why should I pay twice, once for things that actually work, and once for irresponsible and malicious (towards me) people who have their lips super-glued to the rear-ends of medical doctors who look down their nose at their patients? The only way to get the doctors out of power is to separate healthcare from government completely. Let doctors compete fairly with other health care modalities. Let freedom ring.

      • http://lenrftw.net LENR G

        I can see you’ve had some deeply personal experiences that have shaped your opinion. I respect that but it’s wrong-headed to make decisions about large systems based on anecdotal evidence. Science and data need to drive the decision.

        Alternative medicine should be given the same chance as ‘regular’ medicine but in crucible of scientific facts and data, not on the passion of one or hundreds of people.

        There are things that federal government is best positioned to do. The obvious example is the nations defense. So everybody pays, whether you agree with the way it’s spent or not, and everybody benefits. Health care may or may not be one of those things. Many countries have decided it is and they are doing better than us on this front, spending less and enjoying a healthier populace. If we collectively decide to take a similar route it means that everyone will have to pay, whether they agree with the details or not, and everyone will enjoy the benefits. A single payer system would have much going for it. The question is can we do it while preserving the American desire for freedom in choosing doctors and philosophies, to give a name to your personal experiences. And can we make it a truly level playing field where alternative medicines and techniques are evaluated fairly. I don’t know. I do know that I don’t particularly like the role that insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies play right now. We spend too much and get too little. And everything is harder than it needs to be with insurace companies acting like our adversaries just to get reimbursed or get the coverage we were promised.

  • http://lenrftw.net LENR G

    One of hundreds:
    https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2016/04/28/breitbartcom-becoming-media-arm-alt-right

    The best case you can make for him is that he’s doesn’t really mean what he says and it’s just business. That’s splitting hairs. You are as you do in this world.

    • bachcole

      I am disappointed in you. You are quoting a left leaning site that is characterizing a right leaning person. How in the world can you expect objectivity and balance that way??? That is just exactly like my friend Jim going to his physicist brother to get the low-down on cold fusion.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    He is chairman of the Republican Party!! The Republican Party is not Conservative?

  • http://lenrftw.net LENR G

    ….aaaand he picked a white supremacist as his Chief Strategist.

  • http://lenrftw.net LENR G

    Progressives are nothing like communists and don’t lie more than anybody else.

    I can’t believe some of the things being said here. Do you people even hear yourselves talking (typing)?

  • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

    found and relayed by a liberal journalist of business journal in france

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/lesterfeder/this-is-how-steve-bannon-sees-the-entire-world?utm_term=.dh9ydWAea#.ktE8Nndp3

    we are far from what I’ve heard on the news.
    I recognize many statement and diagnostic by Extreme right, and string right, and by strong left and extreme left, and also by root-liberal (economic&social true liberal that are invisible in France, and US) … even by the Pope.

    I buy the critics of Republican conservative as crony-capitalist …
    of Putin kleptocracy vs ISIS fascism…
    of root-capitalism versus crony capitalism of both Washington and Republican party… the hypocrisy of anti-social-freedoms (abortion, gays…) used to sell crony capitalism…

    I’m surprised that they more focus on judeochristianism vision of capitalism and not on ethnicity, unlike what I heard of them on TV…
    However they recognize that some fringe groups express their trouble with ethnicity…
    They also have a vision for all the West… a christian inspired capitalism, vs cronyism and fascism…

    Now question is the implementation, and I’m not so optimistic.
    Good luck US.

    NB: We are the next one in EU. aduhhhh…

  • Chapman

    Holy Crap! A voice of reason and logic! AND a man who actually knows the facts…

    Thank you Mr. Calder.