Robert bryces latest book entitled smaller faster lighter denser cheaper, and i would add, more colorful. [laughter] look at that. Its jumping off the page. Smaller faster lighter denser cheaper is roberts fifth book, and i think quite possibly, his best. First off, it is a relentlessly optimistic, forwardlooking book. In an era with environmental catsties, sectarian catastrophes, sectarian violence, plagues, various other things, i was happy to read some u as robert explains, the promise of tomorrow rests in the fact that we are continuing to innovate by making things, what do you think . Smaller faster lighter denser and cheaper. And in this way the book is a celebration of these attributes, and as he will explain, a rejoinder to the doomsdayers and the cats fists. These are people who have been promulgating the idea of collapsed anxiety meaning our future will be one of scarcity and shortage, but by every measure out there things have been getting better. People are, of course, living longer, healthier, freer lives. But today we still have these neomall fuse yaps out there, and theyre advocating for policies in america that robert reminds us are called degrowth. That sounds great, doesnt it . To learn more, you can call John Hultgren or maybe greenpeace. But robert points out or offers, rather, an alternative vision for americas future. Again, a positive one in which we do more with less and we grow the pie rather than ration it. So as i was reading the book, i said, well, he really seeks to answer two questions; why and how do we keep this going. Rather than saying, well, its going to end soon and throwing hands up in alarm. He wants to see the good times continue to roll. Now, while the substance of roberts talk, im sure, will focus on answering these two questions, why and how do we continue this, i think he offers a Pretty Simple answer that we continue to innovate by making things smaller, lighter, faster, denser and cheaper. And i hope that was in the right order. Now, the book is not a blind celebration of technological advancement, right . You have talking heads on tv, you say, well, well just solve our way out of a problem with new technology. Its more nuanced than that. He, its in some ways a globetrotting showcase of the actual innovations, the real people, the physical companies that are doing the actual stuff. And he takes you around the world. You go to panama, you go to canada, you go around and world, and you see the things that are happening through his3cn very accessible and colorful writing. All of these things, this innovation, though, is underpinned, ultimately, by one thing, and thats cheap, abundant, Reliable Energy. Cheap, abundant, Reliable Energy is at the core of keeping our society healthy, free, strong, and in this way the book is a natural complement to the work we do at the Institutes Center for Energy Policy and the environment. We drive home one message over and over again cheap, abundant, Reliable Energy is needed to continue the american way of life and its economy. Robert is joined at that center by senior fellows mark mills and diana fur. Cot roth, and they educate people on that issue and how do we continue to have more of that sort of energy. The wall street journal called it precisely the kind of journalism that was needed to hold truth to power. He has three books before that. Ill read the titles. Theyre fun titles. He makes this stuff accessible to the everyday reader. Pipe dreams greed, ego and the death of enron in 2002. Next one was cronies oil, the bushes and the rise of americas superstate. In 04. And this is my favorite, gusher of lies in 2008. Roberts all over the place. Whatd you do, 20 tv interviews in the last 48 hours . Yeah. Hes being modest. Hes on bbc, cnn, pbs,npr, you just fill in the threeletter acronyms, hes been on all of those stations. He frequently authors for us, though, beyond these books original research. He hits issues as diverse as debunking wind Energy Policies and the subsidies that accompany it to questions such as how do you alleviate energy poverty, a new area that were exploring. He has a bsa from the university of texas at austin where he lives with his family and his wife, and please join mew in welcoming robert bryce. [applause] good afternoon. Good afternoon. Thank you. I have four points to make, and im going to make them in about 20 minutes. First, gee whiz. Second, slouching toward dystopia. [laughter] do the math, and finally, the second american century. So, gee whiz. This smartphone has 250,000 times the digital Storage Capacity of the computer that went to the moon onboard apollo 11. This ipod nano i just bought it the other day contains as much music as 300 lps. In musical terms, thats about 2,000 in Music Storage terms, its about 2,000 times more efficient by weight and 6,000 times more efficient by volume than an lp. In 1980 photovoltaic solar cells cost more than 20 a watt. Today, less than a dollar a watt. 1903, the Wright Brothers flew in an airplane at about 30 miles per hour. Today we routinely fly onboard 737s, boeing 737s that fly at more than 500 milesser hour. Miles per hour. And we can drink beer and surf the internet while we do it. Fords new engine, an engine that i think is just fascinating, the its the oneliter or ecoboost engine, its a threecylinder engine, it produces 92,000 watts per liter of displacement. From a power density metric, it is 16 times more powerful than the engine that powered the original model t. Ithi also has about the same pr density as the engine in the new supercar that costs 1. 2 million. And yet ford is selling this new oneliter ecoboost, and theyre selling hundreds of thousands of these engines, you can get it in a ford fiesta that costs about 15,000. Since 1978 intel has been increasing the Computing Power density on its top of the line chips, and, in fact, since 1978 the year that i graduated from high school intel has increased the Computing Power density onc the top of the line microprocessors 78,000fold while decreasing the size of its circuits 130fold. Intel now uses 22 nanometer technology. Thats 22 billionths of a meter. Now, i dont know how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, but according to intels new their latest processing technology, they can fit six million transistors on the tip of this pen. Smaller, faster, lighter, denser, cheaper in everything. What is the book about . Its a rebuke to the catastrophists. It is a book that explains how continuing innovation is improving Living Standards all over the world. As michael said, we are inundated with bad news. If it bleeds, it leads in the newspapers, on the television. If it bleeds, it leads. And for years, even for centuries, we have been hearing about the possibility of mass starvation. More recently, peak oil. We hear of any number of threats, epidemics, pandemics, etc. Do we face many problems . There is no question, we face a myriad of problems, and i could spend the rest of the day standing here and explaining even just a few of them. Yes, we face many challenges, no question. Cyber war, conflicts from crimea to damascus, pandemics, epidemics, all of these possibilities and, yes, we have millions, even billions of People Living in poverty. In india alone 400 Million People are living today without electricity. But smaller. L computers, faster communications, lighter engines, denser agriculture and cheaper everything from sanitation and medicine to electricity and transportation has created this revolution in Living Standards all over the world. We are seeing incredible increases in education, in trade, in development all over the world regardless of whether these countries are what their political systems are because that is what we do. We humans are not going to sit around and freeze in the dark. We are going to innovate, and we have done so, and we will continue doing so. Today more people are living longer, freer, healthier lives than at any time in human history. Since the 1970s the number of countries that are considered free has nearly doubled. Income levels among the poorest of the poor are steadily rising. Literacy rates, particularly among women and children, are rising. In 1950 roughly 55 of all adults on the planet were literate. Today its close to 90 . A century ago few women were allowed to vote. Today, with a very few exceptions, saudi arabia and other islamic cups, women are countries, women are allowed to vote and do vote in nearly every country on the planet. In the london games in 2012, the summer olympics, for the first time all of the countries participating in the games had women on their teams, and they participated in the games. Today prejudices based on race, based on gender and, just as important, prejudices based on sexual preference are being cast aside. Finally. And why is that . It is because of the things ive just discussed. Cheaper communications, faster communications, more available computing. All of these forces are forces for good and for change. So slouching toward dystopia. Before i go to that, if you dont mind, id like to acknowledge just a few people. First, i want to acknowledge my friend and my editor at public affairs, lisa coffman. Lisa, would you stand please . [applause] yc ive had an unusual career in parishing. Ive in publishing. Ive published five books, and ive had the same publisher and same editor for all five. And lisa has a peculiar and unique genius for reading a 90,000word manuscript which i, of course, think is perfect [laughter] and she makes it more perfect. I also want to acknowledge emily, publyist at public affairs, who has been tireless in promoting me [applause] and who over the last week has made me the king of all media here in thyself. [laughter] i also want to quickly acknowledge my colleagues at Manhattan Institute. Ive spent nearly my whole career as a freelance journalist, but for four years now ive been at manhattan. Blade runner, 1982, walle, 2008 with. Hunger games, 2008. And even the new leg go movie lego movie [laughter] we are bombarded with a steady diet of tales of a poisoned earth, political systems and desperate people. This view is also presented routinely by the biggest and some of the most powerful environmental groups in america and, in fact, around the world. And its that view, that catastrophist view that were continually presented in popular media. And with this news were continually hit with this idea by the leading environmentalists that we need the cure is, in fact, to revert back to nature, to revert to some kind of 40 acres and a mule, green acres setup with sa sa gabor and eddie arnold, i guess [laughter] that somehow this going back is the way forward. Well, this isnt new. To be clear, we see it in the book of genesis and the garden of eden and the idea that we have fallen from grace. And the idea that we have lost eden and return to nature is a continuing theme that weve seen in the our literature from russo to thorough to thoreau and naomi klein today. 1755, russo gave us the idea of the noble savage. A century later, thoreau told us about the joys of living at walden and advised us to, quote, cultivate poverty like a garden herb. A century after thoreau, we had Rachel Carson and silent spring. After that, edward abbey, the writer who has become the kind of, one of the stars of environmental literature in america. And since nearly the time of russo, weve also been harangued by the mall news i cants. 1798, thomas [inaudible] published his essay in which he said population growth is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce sustenance for man. 1968 paul ehrlich at stanford university, still at stanford university, came out with the population bomb, a book which was published by the sierra club. Ehrlich claimed, quote, the battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death. Consider this statement from the sierra club on nuclear energy, and it has been the sierra clubs policy since 1974, the group said it will remain opposed to nuclear pending, quote development of adequate national and global policies to curb energy overuse and unnecessary Economic Growth. I repeat, curb energy overuse and unnecessary Economic Growth. The catastrophists dont just want to stop unnecessary Economic Growth, they want degrowth. Consider this quote from bill mckibbon, the most famous environmentalist in america. Our systems and economies have gotten too large. We need to Start Building them back down. World watch institute wants to shrink the economies of what it calls overdeveloped countries. The goal should be, quote a steady state Economic System that is in balance with earths limits so that we can, quote, restore the planets ecological systems. In other words to, in their view the way forward is to go backward. And when you consider what the degrowth proponents are advocating, it is clear that they want energy poverty. My third point, do the math. Bill mckibbon is the founder of 350. Org, an organization that aims to drastically cut Carbon Dioxide emissions. Mckibbon has said carbon in the atmosphere, im quoting, carbon in the atmosphere greater than 350 parts per million is not compatible with life on earth. Today our concentration is roughly 400 parts per million. Mckibbon has arrested at the white house protesting the keystone xl pipeline. Hes leading a Divestment Campaign aimed at Getting College endowments to sell their investments in hydrocarbon producers, and hes fond of saying, do the math. And, in fact, 350. Org has a documentary with that very title, do the math. Okay, lets do the math. In 2010 mckibbon wrote, quote we need to cut our fossil fuel use by a factor of 20 over the next few decades. Today we consume roughly 215 Million Barrels of hydrocarbons, 215 Million Barrels of oil per day in the form of hydrocarbons, coal, oil and natural gas. So we cut that by twentyfold, we go down to 11 Million Barrels of Oil Equivalent for the entire world. Thats roughly the amount of energy now consumed by the country of india. To give you another metric, today global gasoline consumption is roughly 22 Million Barrels per day. So were we to follow mckibbons prescription, we would have to halve, cut our gasoline consumption in half, and we wouldnt have any oil, natural gas or coal left over for aviation, electricity production, home heating or industry. In 1800 global population was roughly one billion people, and Energy Consumption was roughly ten Million Barrels of Oil Equivalent per day. Now, nearly all of that, of course, came in the form of renewables, wood, biomass, etc. Today we have seven billion people. We have far more industry. Our economy is orders of magnitude larger, and yet mckibbon wants us to return to Energy Consumption levels that predominated 200 years ago. This is the same man who calls the companies that produce hydrocarbons, quote, a rogue force. What is mckibbons answer for our energy needs . Well, of course, Renewable Energy, the same thing we have heard from sierra club, greenpeace, Natural Resources Defense Council and many other groups like them. Okay, fine. Renewable energy, again, lets do the math. And in doing the math, lets look only at the electricity market. Forget oil and Transportation Energy for the moment and just look at electricity and do the math on electricity. Over the past three decades or so, Global Electricity demand has been increasing by about 450 terra watt hours per year. 450 trillion watt hours per year. Its roughly one new brazil electricity demand being added to Global Electric gland every year for the last 30 years, and if you look at the forecast from the iea, exxonmobil, bp, theyre projecting another brazils worth of electric demand Going Forward for the next 2025 years. So do the math. What would be required if we were to supply all of that incremental demand growth just with solar . And by the way, im bullish on solar. I have solar panels on the roof of my house. And for the record, im opposed to all Energy Subsidies unless im getting them. [laughter] i have 3200 watts of solar panels because, why . Am i stupid . The city of austin paid twothirds of the cost. My neighbors say, oh, i love your solar panels. I say, thank you, you paid for them. [laughter] seems to take a little shine off of the [laughter] but back to solar, if we only wanted to meet incremental demand growth with solar, what would it require . Remember, we have to produce 450 terawatt hours of electricity every year. Well, the math is easy. Look at the Bp Statistical review, Common Source of information. In 2012 germany had more solar capacity, still does, than any other country, about 33,000 megawatts. And in 2012 that capacity produced 28 terawatt hours of electricity. From here the division is easy then. Just to keep pace with demand growth in electricity alone we would have to install on a global basis 16 times as much solar capacity as now exists in germany, and we would have to do so every year. What about wind energy . I am not bullish on wind energy. The power density is the key problem with wind energy. The power dense city of wind energy is one watt per square meter. If we wanted to use wind energy to meet just the incremental demand growth, what would it require . It would require us to install roughly 280,000 megawatts of new Wind Energy Capacity every year. Doing so would require covering a land area of roughly 280,000 square kilometers, a land area nearly the size of italy, and we would have to do so every year. Now, its hard to even comprehend this, so let me break this down a little bit. Were in manhattan. The island of manhattan covers roughly 60 square kilometers. Therefore, again, going back to wind, just to meet incremental demand growth with wind energy would require us to cover roughly an area 13 times the size of manhattan island, and we would have to do so every day. This is the math. Do the math . We did the math. And all the sources that ive just cited to you are in the book. By the way, tell your friends, tell your neighbors. You dont have to read it, you just have to buy it. [laughter] okay, never mind. Moving on. Solar and wind, do math . We did the math. The reality is, the truth is, the simple math is that solar and wind energy cannot even meet incremental demand growth in the Global Energy market, much less displace significant quantities of hydrocarbons. What we have been told repeatedly then by the degrowth crowd, by the catastrophists is that renewables are the answer. The fact is Renewable Energy is the energy form of the past, not the future. Of as i make clear in the book, the future fuels, the fuels of the future are end to end, natural gas to nuclear. Im not arguing that oil and coal are going away, they are not. But if were going to be serious about Climate Change, we are not going to solve the issue of Climate Change with solar panels on Walmart Stores in california. It is not going to happen. If were going to be serious about addressing the issue of Climate Change and co2 emissions, the path forward is obvious, it is n to n, it is natural gas to nuclear. My final point, the second american century. We are beginning a second american century. Why . Because the u. S. Does innovation better than any other country. We are better at smaller, faster, lighter, denser, cheaper than any other country, and there really is no one in second place that is within a mile of where we are. Add in other critical factors, demographics, geography, agriculture, finance, institutions that foster innovation and availability of lowcost resources, and its clear that the u. S. Could scarcely be better positioned. Now, i will gladly stipulate we have many, many problems. Structural unemployment worries me. Gridlock in washington disgusts me. We have excessive government debt, we have excessive regulation, we have excessive medical costs, we have a Defense Department that spends more than 500 billion per year and has yet never passed a financial audit. We have many, many challenges. But when it comes to innovation, no other country does it better, and we can see that here in the United States from the oil patch to silicon valley. The u. S. Has less than 5 of the worlds population, but it has been home to nearly 40 of all the nobel prize winners. The u. S. Is a place where people want to start and own their own businesses. I live in austin, texas. And every year i go to the south by southwest interactive festival, and to me, it represents the best of america. I went this march, there were more than 30,000 people there, and they were all on the make, and i thought it was great. They were all there promoting their new web site, their new business, their new product. In the book i talk about a Company Called boosted boards. There was a guy just wandering the halls, this was last year, a guy named matt tran, and he was in a hoodie and jeans, and he was carrying around a skateboard. I thought, what is this guy doing here . He and some friends of his were graduates from stanford, and they created a company that is an electric skateboard controlled by an electronic controller in their hand, had regenerative breaking lithium ion batteries, it was a marvel of technology, and they printed the components of it on a 3d printer. And out of nowhere, theyd started their own company. Americans are entrepreneurial. They dont want to work for the man, they want to be the man. We have the entrepreneurs, we have the schools, were blessed with favorable demographics and geography, our schools incubate innovation more than any other country in the world. But along with all of that, we have cheap, abundant, Reliable Energy at a time when the rest of the world, in general, does not. European steel makers are now paying twice as much for electricity and four times as much for their natural gas as steel producers here in the United States. Foreign investors from egypt, pakistan, france, germany and numerous other countries are now investing billions of dollars in the United States in order to take advantage of cheap energy thats available here. So let me draw this to a close by making what i think is a key point and, actually, i have to credit howard cuesic for this term. I think hes exhausted his quota of hyphens, but nevertheless, we reject the catastrophists and the degrowth proponents. We have to reject this pessimistic view of the future. And this, make no mistake, is a philosophical and a political battle. If we follow the prescriptions being put forward by the catastrophists and the degrowth people, we will end up creating the dystopia we keep hearing about. Paving the countryside with Wind Turbines and even worse, planting it with biofuels is the antithesis of environmental protection. F we need density. Density is green. We should be seeking dense Power Sources because small footprints are the environmental ideal. We need Economic Growth because its the wealthy countries who can afford environmental protection, the poor countries in general cannot. We need optimism. We need an outlook that embraces humanism and technology. We need to get good at nuclear, and we are. We need to harness the incredible power of the atom, and in doing so, make that harnessing safer and cheaper, and we are. We need to make Energy Cheaper for everyone on this planet because lowcost energy is the foundation of modern soa. Society. We need technology and Economic Growth because they have brought and are bringing tens of millions of people all over the world out of the dark and into the electriclit world of ideas and freer, longer, healthier lives. I am, as the late author molly ivins used to say, optimistic to the point of idiocy. And that nearly idiotic optimism that i retain comes from the inexorable human desire for smaller, faster, lighter, denser, cheaper. Thank you. [applause] i should tell you to stop, but i dont no, sorry. [laughter] theres a microphone. If we have questions, comments, disagreements, raise your hand and debbie or alyssa will get to you shortly. Theres one. Bob weisberg. What would you do about Energy Shortages and backward i hate to use that word, but they are places, rural india, rural south america, you know, all over the world people have a hard time putting two and two together, and theyre not going to go for hightech solutions. I dont know if they even run lowtech solutions, but they are the contributors to much of the worlds pollution. Sure. And thats a great question. And in some of these rural areas, Solar Energy Makes a great deal of sense. Theyre far from the grid, and even a small battery where you have a family and you have a couple of solar panels and a few led lights and a battery, it changes their lives to allow their kids to read at night. I mean, it truly is a breakthrough technology. So im very hopeful for this proliferation of lowcost solar for places particularly that are off the grid, island economies, etc. But being able to provide lowcost energy and clean Burning Energy is a critically important, a critically important thing. Look at india alone. A million women and children, mostly girls, are dying every year because of indoor air pollution from poor combustion stoves and low quality fuels. A million a year. What they need is propane. What they need is butane. Even better, natural gas and electricity. But allowing that to happen, it requires this is the problem with electrification in the developing world. You need civil society. You need people convinced that when they use electricity, theyre going to pay for it. And for a lot of countries, the political operators want to just provide electricity as a way to get more votes, and charging for it and and even having this billing system in place, all of those things are they require civil society. And its damn hard. So if i had the magic bullet, id be out there doing it right now. I know in this building and a whole bunch of other ones in downtown new york, id own this and a whole other buildings in downtown new york if i knew the answer. Theres a question over here. Come across any strategy that youve ever seen work [inaudible] to the people who are really over the top about things like wind power and other nonworking Energy Policies to forgo their fantasies . Well, convincing people to use hath and physics is a to use math and physics is a difficult proposition. And, you know, make no mistake, the lobbies that the lobby entities that are advocating for more solar and wind and the subsidies that go with them and other alternative energy forms, theyre very powerful. And they have a powerful constituency in washington. But the only way i know to fight them and the only way i know to counter some of the arguments that are put forward is to use math and physics, to just go back to the basic power density and do simple addition, Simple Division saying, well, this is what you want to provide, heres how much land you need, how much its going to cost. I dont know any other way to come at it except with the truth and base the truth in basic math and physics. Hi [inaudible] with the atlas Economic Research foundation. You talked about poor people in india and africa, so forth. We have poor people in new york and california sure. Unfortunately, a lot of these people are not being sufficiently educated so they might work in a place like the Manhattan Institute or mack kenzie, what have you. And im wondering what the prospects are for keeping manufacturing here, expanding manufacturing in this country, and apart from the economics of that, what does this prospect have to say for creating opportunity for people who right now are looking around and not having a lot of skills and not having much to do sure. And by the way, with that angle perhaps give us an entree to give people on the left a way to get interested in what youre talking about. Well, first, manufacturing, its coming back. I mentioned the pakistanis and the egyptians, there are two companies that are now building fertilizer plants, spending over 1. 4 billion each building fertilizer plants, one in iowa and one in india. Basf, the biggest chemical maker in the world, their chief executive or one of their top executives recently told i think it was the wall street journal that if they moved all of their chemical operations around the world to the u. S. , they would save 700 million a year in energy costs alone. France, the french, a french steelmaking company just finished building a new steel mill in youngstown, ohio. I mean, this Foreign Investment thats coming to the u. S. Now is going to continue coming even if Natural Gas Prices rise somewhat because even if Natural Gas Prices rise somewhat from here at four, four and a half bucks per million btu, its still dramatically cheaper than it is, rather, in western europe, and its a fourth of what it is in japan. So one of the reasons im so bullish on the u. S. Is this abundance of natural gas thats attracting more earth lean production earth lean production, and the value chain within drilling industry itself is creating all kinds of knockon effects in trucking, in rail, in hotels, in hospitality. You name it. I mean, it is a remarkable Economic Growth engine that i was at purdue last fall, and an Energy Economist there and his colleagues estimated the shale revolution which started here roughly six years ago is now adding three Percentage Points to u. S. Gdp. Roughly 500 billion a year to u. S. Gdp. Imagine what imagine what the unemployment numbers would look like without that. Its a remarkable story, and it wouldnt have happened anywhere else but here in the u. S. We are perfectly positioned to take advantage of shale. When i was in college in northern new england, the Vermont Nuclear plant supplied about a third of our power. Your good friend, bill mckibbon, just helped shut that down. What do you think the future of Nuclear Power is technologically, economically and politically . Sure. My position on nuclear even after fukushima and particularly after talk about fukushima, anda chapter in the book where i say it seems a little odd to say it, but after fukushima, the prospects for nuclear have never been better. In my view, when it comes to the issue of Climate Change and nuclear, its very simple. If youre antinuclear, youre prodarkness. [laughter] theres [applause] if youre antiCarbon Dioxide and antinuclear, you are in favor of blackouts. Im adamantly opposed to blackouts. Im for cold beer and airconditioning for everybody. [laughter] but nuclear is problematic right now, particularly in the u. S. , mainly because of cost. Look at georgia. Theyre building two new reactors there, theyre going to cost about 6900 per installed kilowatt. You can build now, utilities or electric generators can build natural gasfired capacities for about 1200 per kilowatt. Coalfired maybe 3000 per kilowatt. So the problem for the u. S. And around the world continues to be for nuclear high cost. Safety, yes, regulatory issues, yes, but we have other stumbling blocks on the International Front that i think are also going to slow the deployment of nuclear. Longer term im bullish, why . Because of different technologies that are available, small modular reactors. Bill gates is investing in a Company Calledder the power with whats called a wave reactor. Were seeing new technologies and ventures being applied in the nuclear space, and i think thats incredibly promising. But make no mistake, its going to take a long time. And if theres going to be a modular reactor built in the u. S. , theres a Company Called new scale based in the oregon, theyre likeliest projection if theyre able to build one the earliest they could do it would be something on the order of 2023. So as hopeful as i am about nuclear, its a ways off. Yeah, chuck. Not sure this is a valid question. Go ahead. Never mind. Been concerned for a long time about our educational system trying to teach selfesteem, and i think the result of it has been young people are against any change. And how can we stop that trend, just keep it the same way it is now . Its a pretty good deal, i dont want any change. With huh. Well, ill respond with this, you know, i may be not the right one to ask about that particular issue. My wife and i, lauren, have home schooled our kids for much of their lives. And what weve seen now lately is really a huge change in the opportunities for everyone. Not just home schoolers, but look at cab academy khan academy. Mooks. This flattening, i think is the best word for it, the flattening of the educational system where students who are interested in Computer Programming or my son who is taking calculus, he could take it online. He doesnt have to go to the Austin Community college or the local community college, he can take it online for free. Now, thats radical. And that is not just radical for the u. S. , its radical for people all over the world. And that is one of the reasons why im so incredibly hopeful. You talk about faster, cheaper education . Absolutely. Hi. When i see measurements of Economic Freedom declining so much in the United States, i get pessimistic. And if that continues, cant it overshadow advantages such as cheap energy . Absolutely. Of course. And this is why it is a political and ideological battle that here the u. S. Is poised for a lot of growth, a lot of potential, and yet when it comes to energy in particular, we have a very effective lobby thats saying, oh, we want to follow the european model. And that leaves me gob smacked, to use an englishism. Are you kidding . You want to follow the european model after weve already seen how damaging this headlong pursuit of renewables has been for the European Union in general and for germany in particular . So i dont dispute what youre saying, but this is part of the reason why i wrote this book. I think its one of the, i mean, the reasons why Manhattan Institute exists. We have to continue to promote this idea of liberty and Economic Growth, because those are the engines of development. And its always going to be a tension between how much government is the right amount. And we need government, no question about it. But thats the tension. And there has to be both robust intellectual arguments and effective political motivation to make sure that we have that Economic Growth and forces for liberty always out there pushing to keep the government, the size of government in check so that we can allow more Economic Growth. Boy, im just going off here. [laughter] im going all joel osteen on you here. [laughter] yeah. Bob james. Might expand on what you mean by cheaper. People are likely to believe that energy itself is more, is cheaper today than it was seven years ago. It buys a lot more, but its higher oil costs per barrel and coal and gas, they are higher years ago. Fair enough. But one of the points i make in the book is today, i was born in 1960. Today in real dollar terms residential electricity is 40 cheaper than it was the year i was born. Its a remarkable development. Yes, some things are getting more expensive. Gasoline, you know, weve seen it fairly flat over time in real dollar terms, the cost of gasolines been flat really since the 70s. Now, People Discount that, but were not yes, a gallon of gasoline still may be 3 in real terms, but our engines are more efficient so that were using it more efficiently, so that were getting more power out of the energy we consume. And why is that . Smaller, faster, lighter, denser, cheaper. Its what we do. A couple of weeks ago the wall street journal reported that shale gas at the wellhead in pennsylvania is Something Like more than 3 per is it thousand cubic feet . Sure. And that Consumer Prices here in new york city exceed 23 25, and its even higher in boston. The article attributed that to lack of a natural pipeline from the wellhead into new york city and into boston. So my question to you is what sorts of obstacles or why isnt there a furious Building Program going on now to get the very inexpensive product in pennsylvania to consumers in new york city which seems to be a huge and, i would assume, willing market for such an sure. But what are the obstacles to getting pipelines in place . Why is there no construction, why is there no activity . For an opportunity like that . Sure. [inaudible conversations] there has been a pipeline built, and it was just built within the last 18 months, was finished by specter energy. It was, if memory serves, i think it was a 20mile pipeline, and it cost a billion dollars. And mark rough ruffalo and yoko ono fought it tooth and nail because they didnt want fracked gas, piped into new york city from wells that had been hydraulic fractured. I heard from someone that the price of natural gas, the city gave price of natural gas that day fell by several dollars. So new york is problematic when it comes to any kind of new infrastructure. But you add in the fact that the public has been conditioned over decades to hate the oil and gas industry. And, second, that its a maze of regulatory entities that govern pipelines in and around new york and new jersey, and all the infrastructure that then has to be avoided to build a pipeline, its complicated. So theres no question the Resource Base in pittsburgh and in the marcellus is enormous. As a friend of mine said, the gas though gas there is though theres prudhoe bay under pittsburgh. And its a pretty good line. But getting that gas to market, it is problematic especially in and around a population area thats as densely populated as this. Yes, sir. Thisll be the final question. Last question then, thank you. Basically, i think youre telling us theres a lot of opportunity for improvement and growth, but our economy is not really growing that well. What do you think are the couple of barriers that we need to remove to really get this to work and rial get back to really get back to Economic Prosperity . You know, if i had all the answers to that, id be richer than karl rove. I dont [laughter] i like karl rove, from austin, its okay. You know, clearly having a government really believing and policy makers really believing and advocating for cheap, abundant, Reliable Energy is clearly part of that. And instead what weve had is a lot of social engineering and a lot of, you know, talk about, well, were tackling Climate Change when, in fact, the u. S. Is leading the world in reducing co2 emissions and not by a little bit, but by a lot. You know, clearly part of it is going to have to be revisiting the regulatory regimes everywhere to unlock more growth. But i think it fundamentally starts with cheap, abundant, Reliable Energy and then the regulatory state. Okay, well, im getting the hook. Thank you. [applause] youre watching booktv on cspan2. Heres our prime time lineup for tonight. At 7 15 p. M. Eastern, john fund and [inaudible] discuss eric holder and his management of the justice department. Then at 8 15, Heather Williams sits down with booktv to talk about her book, help me to find my people. At 9 p. M. Eastern time, former
vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.