a passion for supporting local communities and pioneering in novel to ask for can science and technology projects. how, how beautiful, how glorious. all of us on this planet and not just asked for algebra for the leading by chemist, determined to use a scientific knowledge to sub africa. women make science from the lab to the field. oh, now to sierra, the hello, i'm adrian instead of getting this is counting the cost on elders 0. your weekly look at the business and economics. this week, donald trump signals a dramatic utah on us energy policy. the president says he's unleashing oil. is the

american energy landscape being re shape to the how will the rest of the world be affected? big banks of pulled out of climate change groups to what's behind the ext. there's a financial institution still in the climate place. trump has pledged to make the us the crypto capital of the world. these launched his own main points, but is that a conflict of interest as well as policies boost his own digital assets, as well as crypto currencies. in general, the a dramatic type up to fossil fuels president donald trump says the people increase oil output unleashed the already booming us energy production industry. he's also declare a national energy emergency the 1st president to do so. well, oil companies might be celebrating. trump also pledge to roll back support for clean energy spelling trouble for that fact. he says his plans are aimed at their

cheating, domestic prosperity and cutting inflation since oil and gas prices touch every parts of the economy. the measures could have serious implications across the entire energy landscape from oil feels to wind farms of the ripple effect could be felt worldwide. we'll discuss all of that with, i guess, to just a moment. but 1st report from dimitry. net that ankle on his 1st day in the office, donald trump made quite the entrance, issuing a flurry of orders which include declaring a national energy emergency. we will drill baby, drill to health issues, and that's the oil and gas produces much quicker. ignoring ecological concerns. america will be a manufacturing nation once again, and we have something that no other manufacturing nation will ever have the largest amount of oil and gas or any country owners. and we are going to use it to me,

use the prices down, feel our strategic reserves up again, right to the top and export american energy all over the world. trump's decrees include a resumption of liquefied natural gas exports withdrawal from the powers climate deal, something he also didn't lose 1st in order to allow the us to drill for oil in the arctic, notably in alaska and topping up us strategic oil reserves which the vitamin ministration drove to 40 year low trying to cope gasoline prices. the u. s. is already the largest oil producer in the world and has been for the past 6 years. present thing with the face know, industry showcase and plus the phones. but because of the import control of the energy security and us national security and the kind of security during that,

the trop 2nd chair because the morning missed, but i'm, it's almost exciting production of this or then guys, especially michelle site that especially this. oh, let's go ration oil is traded on international markets. what prices move according to supply demand and geo politics. if the us pumps me well, the price per barrel could full meaning cheaper gas for consumers. but opec nations can offset that by limiting their own production. keeping global prices stable, whether they will remains to be seen trumps energy plans have good environmental activists who will likely challenges policies via the quotes in the years to come. just as they did in his 1st to meet them at bank of al jazeera, for counting the cost that hers is an energy economist electra at the university of houston. he joins us now from houston. so trump has declared an energy emergency.

what do you make of that, ed? is it more to do with politics and money, or is that genuinely intimate and an energy emergency of us? there's, there's no emergency. but i think that really has to do with politics. and the fact that president trump promised the voters that he would lower the price of gasoline to a $1.87, a gallon. and that he would lower the cost of electricity, which has been going up across the united states. and he's also promised the us oil patch that we would drill a baby drill to accomplish this. but as we all know, it takes higher prices to encourage wall street to invest to, to drill more wells. and to get to a $1.87, a gallon gasoline, that would mean the price of oil would have to be less than $50.00 a barrel. and in the permian basin across so the west texas oil patch, which produces about 4000000 barrels a day. the rates are being laid down at prices of $70.00

a barrel. and in the recent dallas federal reserve, pat analysis of the survey, more than half of the producers indicated that they would not be drilling new wells unless the price remained above $70.00 a barrel. so, you know, in the 1st instance, president trump's initiatives would appear to be mutually exclusive. going ahead, we know that the tariffs that he proposes to put in place will increase the cost of drilling dramatically. the, the tubulars i know of many of the oil patch, your currently acquiring tubulars and even hoarding them for the casing. the piping down whole 25 percent increase in the cost of steel coming across $1.00 board or another is going to have a serious impact. and again, diminished the opportunity to drill more in the united states. you talked about us

oil produces, needing the price of all to stay above $70.00 a barrel. what will this drill? drill, drill, policy means opec produces in the rest of the world. i won't mean anything for old pack us. oil patch has, has been battered by various policies, volatile policies from one administration to the next over the last 30 years. and it wall street is exacting a discipline on the the oil, patrick, across the united states. the president, just asking people to drill is not going to make that happen. uh, opening up lands uh in the gulf of mexico, the atlantic seaboard to be base. our area is the president trump and his 1st term put off limits to oil and gas development, alaska, the oil patch, and band and the alaska more than 10 years ago. and we all recall shell oil losing a rate there i it's not going to happen. everyone in the united states understands

that the us is the high cost producer in a global commodity market. we've been in a price more with opec that just didn't turn out well. and we remember that in 2014, 20152016. and in fact, during president trump's 1st term, he was able to convince the saudi arabia to keep the flow of oil up and the price down that bankrupted a large number of us oil producers. at that time, the president, this whole took more than $300000000000.00 in green infrastructure funding. what does that mean for the green energy sector? the climate itself and the transition to clean a sources of energy? oh, the cat is out of the bag. the energy transition is underway. we've just been through a horrible winter storm in texas,

and it was wind energy that kept the grid going and alive and operating perfectly. during this, this really difficult ice and snow storm. it's still below freezing right now. uh, president, trump can't put that back in the bag or the reverse that he can slowly keep in mind that the major oil companies understand that we need to reduce our carbon emissions. and in fact, pauline for the last 15 years across united states comes out with the 7576 percent desire by the voters to have a cleaner environment with less submissions. that's where we are going. simply reversing the funding that the i are reyes is producing also is going to be proper manic for the top administration. more than 80 percent of these funds are being expended in republican states and republican districts. that's where the energy

infrastructure is. you know, houston is the energy capital of the world, the technology and the intellectual property for, for oil and gas and for batteries and for wind and solar, reside here with our major universities. it's um, its kind to be difficult to, to turn this off. so the money that has been invested sofa in the transition to clean energy hasn't gone to waste. you know, it, it has that this money has been useful in advancing the, the cost curves. but certainly china is the global leader in the production of solar panels. but a lot of that technology came from nasa here in houston and from the united states . it's a question of, of allocating the production, the implementation, one of the challenges that the president trump would have,

and lowering the cost of electricity for americans as that it's never been cheaper . it's driven primarily by the price of natural gas across the united states. currently, that price is average less than $4.00 per m and b to you for the last several years . that's driven us electricity prices down the, the tremendous ambrose that solar farms and wind farms have made across the united states, especially in texas. a further will will push the price of electricity down. but keep in mind that more than 10 years ago, before the energy transition was in full swing, the, the assessments for the united states is going to have to spend at least 2 trillion dollars to upgrade the infrastructure of our electricity distribution system. very thing in the united states that infrastructure times has been neglected for several decades. now, no politician, no electric politician wants to spend money that has to be paid for,

but to increase taxes, and that would come from roads or buildings or sewers or water infrastructure and our electricity infrastructure has suffered in the same way. ed, it's been really good to talk to you on counting the cost many. thanks today for being with my pleasure. thank you. donald trump held off on his threat of tariffs on his 1st day as president, but he said he is considering opposing a 10 percent target funding ports of chinese made goods. as soon as the stops of february and of that could impact chinese businesses, which are invested heavily in african countries, nicholas hawk reports not from the sound of all this chinese own factory instead of go manufacturers, trousers, shirts, and shorts sold in us stores feeding. what manager, mom, its, are described as americans appetite for past fashion. but with donald trump's return to the white house,

he's worried african countries will be caught in the middle of a trade war between the us and china. that one who was punishing well, i work for the chinese, but i chase after the americans, they're the customers and the customer is always key. we have to keep the american satisfied because our link to the chinese is only the raw material. the fabric. if our leaders reopened local fiber in factories, we could easily move on from the chinese. we can't afford to lose the customers. under the african growth and the opportunity act. countries on the continent could export goods to the united states duty free. it takes just 14 days for the clothes made in west africa to reach american shores. compared with the 9 months it takes for shipments from try it out. the sending of these workers here produced over a 1000000 garments all destined to the united states. they were sent just 2 weeks ago. there is the norm as potential here, but look at the factory floor. now. the owners are waiting to hear from

trump's new administration's decision on existing trade deals. and so this chinese factory of africa holds by thread. the trump says, current trade agreements are unfair to american businesses, putting their future in doubts. in february, he's due to visit the continent for the 1st time when he attends the g. 20 summit in south africa with this date 20 presidency. i suppose trump will be looking more at quick wins for american businesses, for american financial institutions, who would really be looking towards building partnerships that will be bringing about stability, which is the biggest thing that has rocking a lot of african countries. trump, to return to power comes as west african nations severed ties with the us for russia. and us support for israel, strange african relations for their mid this uncertainty, star searches for new buyers, shifting tree potential away from the united states and into the hands of its rivals. nicholas hawk. l. just the right term. yeah, jo, senegal,

it aims to accelerate climate action among financial institutions, the u. n. but net 0 banking alliance is a voluntary network of global banks. committed to align lending and investment portfolios with net 0 emissions by 2050. but critics, including the us republican politicians, say that the industry group was effectively coordinating a boy cost of investment in the oil and gas industry, big banks and asset managers on a quick thing, the climate change network ends at be a loss rate for of canada's biggest lenders said that they were withdrawing from it too. that's up to 6 of the us as largest banks, quit the group, including jp morgan, goldman sachs, and morgan stanley, european bank. so threatened to pull out of the group as well, unless it's softens its rules. the u. s. federal reserve has said that it will quit another group, the network for breeding the financial system because it says its work has broken beyond the central banks mandate from congress. a top court has

a cd electra and sustainability at yale university. he works at the intersection of sustainability and the best of value when he joins us now from new haven, connecticut to, to have you with a start. does this mean the lenders going soft on a lining that portfolios with climate change goals? it's actually unclear what the banks are going to do behind the scenes of these announcements. it could be that they are going soft that they'll use as an excuse to allow more climate risk and comment and emissions into their portfolios. or they might just leave the, the, the net 0 bank alliance has a, a method to allow them to diversify their portfolio. keep fossil fuel companies in and let these kind of climate risks klein within there's portfolios. all right, so the banks still recognize the risk of climate change policies to the lending portfolios. yeah, i think it's clear that the, at this point says,

lenders, banks, any financial institution, understands the risks of climate adaptation to their portfolio. whether that's severe weather or droughts, disruptions to business, etc. the challenge is that in the short term, and then the proximal effect of having fossil fuel companies having high emissions in your portfolio, will have the strong returns. but in the long term, those climate impacts are going to be negative, but they'll be distributed and that's future cash flow, which means this discounted. so we're waiting as a bank or lender, those short term immediate benefits against potentially catastrophic long term negative impacts. so what's this really all about that? how do we explain why banks and lenders leaving the, the ends at the b a and other climate climate focus groups it's, it's purely political actually. i don't think it's not,

it's very political at all. i think this is just down to a financial or a fiduciary decision. there's pressure from shareholders to show short term returns and excluding high emission companies from your lending portfolio can reduce your returns in the short term. so the, the politics i think are in that boat of sales, the banks understand those risks and they're going to integrate climate risk as effectively as they can. but these announcements, these, the, the, the, the, the lack of commitment to these, to the net 0 bank alliance. for example, really reflects, i think of financial decisions by banks to focus on short term returns to a p shareholders. and that you can avoid the politics by just avoiding the terminology that are okay. and the hot button top terms that politicians care about what you're going to is saying that the banks will continue to walk the wolf and

not told the talk about it isn't back. incredibly short sighted of the i hope they continue to walk the walk. it's possible that this is just the harbinger of, you know, giving up on climate emissions entirely and, and allowing that risk into the portfolio of. but my sense is that the vast majority of climate risk is understood by bank so that they'll keep an eye on that and the portfolio. and so what we'll see is they'll, well, while they won't constrain themselves to a particular, um, you know, a commitment. and they will continue to report on those climate risk mitigate those climate risk and their portfolio and disclose that to their shareholders as a matter of course. but just not within the constraints of a, of a particular commitment, like dancing the end of what message told us is this sending to smaller banks and lenders i'm to the wider economy. yeah, i don't think it's

a good method. so as large banks, you know, make a public announcements that they're no longer going to be constrained by these commitments. even if they continue to integrate those risk some of their portfolio, it sends a public mention message that they care less. so perhaps smaller banks decide they're not going to wait into these climate risk waters because it's too complicated, or maybe the, the, the recipients of the loans decide, well we don't have as much pressure on us to reduce emissions and to keep an eye on this. so i think broadly getting out of these commitments sends a poor message around climate risk to the economy. and we might see a slowing down as a result of commitments among the the companies that are taking these loans on top has been really good stuff to you on cash in the costs. thanks for being with us. my pleasure. thank you. are now in sharp contrast is pretty, the size of president trump has promised us in a golden age for crypto currency. on the campaign trail, trump pledge to create

a strategic bit coin stockpile at a point financial regulators. the take a more positive stance towards digital assets. bitcoin and other digital coins have skyrocketed since he won't be election in november. but the president's family is invested in the crypto currency market, raising questions around a conflict of interest that even most so often trump launched a so called main point of his own free days ahead of his an organization. on january 20th, trump launched his own trump tokens, followed by his wife's maloney, a queen, but both shots up in value, draw oregon billions of dollars and trading volume trumps coin became a top 20 crypto currency. the trump affiliated companies behind these assets say the not for the investment or securities, but a means of showing support for the power company. so what all being coins as well. they started off as an internet joke, and the name means there were thousands in existence and anyone can create one name

coins are often highly volatile and can choose up all most dive within a day. the 1st one was of course, those point which started off as assess on the, on crypto currencies, but became a top 10 crypto currency market with up to $85000000000.00. its value has increased almost 5 fold in the past year. from stocum isn't the 1st digital asset he's tried to sell in the past 2 years. he's released a series of n f. t is on non fungible tokens the digital images show him in various cartoonish ways from cowboy, the super hero. hey, ryan, is an all set and lecturing fellow at duke university and a full, a federal reserve economists to join us now from durham, north carolina. good teddy with us at lee, is the conflict of interest to you. it has trump acted on ethically by launching his own coin. well, i think there's a pretty clear conflict of interest because the regulatory environment in the us around crypto crises very much on certain and on the campaign trail. you know,

trump probably said that you wanted to make the us the crypto capital of the world and roll out this, you know, for light touch regulatory framework for good. so now, you know, 3 days before he's sworn in, he's lost his own crypto currency, and he's going to have the ability to influence how, you know, his crypto courtesy is regulated and how the entire industry is regulated. so that's, you know, the 1st conflict of interest, i think it was even more concerning from my standpoint, is that now any entity individual has the ability to, you know, directly curry favor with president trump by simply just, you know, buying his crypto currency and pushing the price up, so you know, it makes influence peddling a lot easier. so there's, you know, conflicts of interest along multiple lines here. okay. and it's the regularly for a framework in place to, to, to, to, to, to sort this out to, to,

to bring it to light. oh, well, i mean, what, i think there's the 1st, you know, there's one question which is, is there a regulatory framework? i would suggest, you know, yes there is. but then the next question is, well, will that be in force? will it be applied to this specific instance here? and i, you know, i think the answer to that question is, is probably not, you know, president drum has, you know, already has a majority of the securities and exchange commission in terms of republicans. you know, he's nominated someone else who used to be the chair of the fcc, paul atkins and, and, you know, mr. atkins, um, you know, seems to be favorably disposed to decrypt out. um, you know, so i don't really foresee any type of, you know, regulatory action uh, ever coming against the i guess the, the trunk organization for this uh, cook differentiated last year of with his launching his own crypto currency. will that bring crypto will generally do thinking into the main stream?

what does is motivation, do you think it's all about making money? of course it is. yeah. i mean it's, it's hard to, to spin it any other way. um, frankly, and, and certainly he asked me a lot of money in the 1st couple of days. your answer is interesting. the reaction that you've seen, you know, from the crypto community, which has been overwhelmingly negative because, you know, they've been trying, you know, very hard over the past couple years after you know, f t x in, in standby and freedom floated to re cast themselves as you know, responsible industry that's, you know, just driving innovation and wants, you know, clear rules of the row row so that they can operate. and then along comes, you know, president trump and launch is this just purely speculative crypto currency that serves no purpose whatsoever in the industry recognizes that this is not a good luck for them, that this could actually undermine

a lot of their efforts. they've taken, you know, over the past couple years, you know, to come across as, as legitimate. so i actually think it's counterproductive for, for the crypto sector in general and, and as you suggested, i mean, i think it's just a pure, you know, money graph from, from the trunk organizations. because and in that case they asked me said, credit cards in general have arisen since the election in november. is there a danger of an asset bubble here? if it busts who stands to lose most as well? and, you know, anytime you have is an asset bubble that 1st the people who, who lose the most of the people who got in the, you know, right before, but right in the people who tend to get in, you know, at that last 2nd, last minute tend to be the least sophisticated the lease and form in the least able financially to absorb these losses. so that is something that really does concern me here because a lot of folks are,

are remain skeptical of crypto currency. i think if you're trying to the average person about it, you're the 1st thing that's going to come to mind is sam being free and after you asked you, what is, is you? well, now you know, donald trump is wildly popular with, with half the country. and so when he watches his own crypto currency, i think there is a fear that people who you know, otherwise wouldn't invest in the asset. say hey, you know what the president trump is doing it, there must be something legit and let me get into. so um, so from our standpoint i think i think we are kind of in a frosty market. um yeah. decrypt, so market has cycled before it has been multiple boom and bust cycles. that dynamic is not going to change. you know, and i think we could look at sort of this moment with the, the trunk point is kind of representing the peak of that bubble. but i could be wrong and it could be more room to run. and obviously president trump is going to try to push the legislation that will help the industry. and maybe that will push prices up further. but you know, this is an asset class. it doesn't have, you know,

any fundamentals. there's no cash flow, there's no revenue. so it, it trades entirely on sentiment. and as we've seen in the past, you know, sentiment is, is simple right now. it's positive, but it could change in a heartbeat. but it's been good still to kind of get the costs. thanks for being with us. thanks for having me to that. so i'll show for this week if you'd like to comment on anything that you've seen, i'm at a finnegan on x. please try to remember to use the hash tag h a c t c. you could also drop us a line caching. the cost of houses 0 dot net is our email address this time of your online, out a 0 dot com slash ctc. that takes you straight to our page and they will find individual reports, links, an entire additions for you to catch up. but that's it for this edition of counting the cost on a tree and putting it on the team here. and they'll have face of being with us. the news on alpha 0 is that the

this is reframe in this series. we'll be discussing the war in gaza. and israel's military condo complex is now the ongoing, the moneys ation posting and people in each row award winning with us by some of the to speak to is really political activist. you need novak what is row and what these rarely all me cold collateral damage is not something that was done by mistake. we frame on out is in the . ringback the

challenges here with the the last names for his right in the mail. so does it plans to release on saturday and exchange for $200.00 for the improvements are in jordan, this is out. is there a license coming up? that's the only thing task of rebuilding garza for 15 months of relentless is ready for me. we'll hear from us demands that there's really many tricks funds that

separation and the outside westbank at least 14 people have been killed since tuesday.