hundreds of them, thousands of them, but we have not had access to their words. sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span skew in. you can -- at c-span's q and a are on our app. washington journal continues. journal continues. host: she is in energy and environmental policy vice president and charles hernick for the citizen for american progress solutions, policy and advocacy vice president. welcome to both of you. kristi, can you tell us about the center for american progress and your role? guest: absolutely.

thank you for having me. the center for american progress is a nonprofit think tank in washington, d.c. working on the immigration and environment and energy issues. we do a lot of work on climate change, obviously, and looking at the role of renewables in our energy mix and then traditional developments of fossil fuels as well. host: charles, can you tell us about the citizens for responsible energy solutions and your mission? guest: thank you for having me this morning. citizens for responsible energy solutions focuses on all of the above, clean energy strategies we can deploy using the free market and making that transition to clean energy as quickly as possible and reducing greenhouse gas emissions not just within the united states, but globally. host: christy, senator

manchin tweeted that we need to stop allowing vladimir putin to use energy as a weapon. do you agree? what is your reaction? >> the concern is that we see so much volatility that it will cause a pretty dramatic spike in costs. while i think that d.c. and everyone, bipartisan democrats and republicans are rallying around the idea, it will take a little time to figure out how to implement that in a way that it has the least amount of impacts on consumers in the united states. we've already heard from developers in the united states, like pioneer natural resources, their ceo was very clear that producers are not going to be able to fill that gap right away. it will send prices pretty dramatically higher. to take a step like that we have to do it responsibly and understand the implications.

host: charles, your thoughts? has energy become a weapon in this war? what do you think is the best way to move forward? guest: it absolutely has. for all of my career i worked on energy and clean energy as a tool for creating prosperity, not just within the united states but around the world. it can be a tool for peace. but we are seeing the weaponization of energy and we need to cut off prudence source of power specifically. -- putin's source of power specifically. i agree with those who propose the shutoff of russian gas. we need a strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and strengthen national security at home. we can do both. that has been lacking but we need to confront this issue head-on. the markets are responding and not receiving russian gas and

oil shipments because the private sector views it as too risky. i think that is constructive and i'm happy that there is a group of american politicians willing to follow the lead of those corporate's, but there is more that can be done. -- corporates, but there is more that can be done. host: viewers, you can weigh in and ask our panelists questions. call in at (202) 748-8000 for republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. charles, can you explain why gas prices have gone up as a result of the war in ukraine? guest: gas prices have gone up because throughout the entire supply chain there is added risk. you've saw gas prices go up even before the conflict happens. we are likely to see gas prices continue to increase.

there is some release of strategic petroleum reserves, an important band-aid, but we need to focus on getting production back to pre-pandemic levels for oil and gas and take pride in the fact that the united states produces oil and gas to a higher environmental standard than almost anywhere else in the world and that we can export liquid bio natural gas. last year we increased liquid bio natural gas by 60%. there has been more gas for our allies in europe at a vital time in their history, but also we've sent gas to folks in asia who are switching from coal to natural gas. it is an important tool for peace and for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. host: senator murkowski on thursday joined a bipartisan group of members supporting legislation to ban russian

energy. here is a portion. [video clip] sen. murkowski: putin is not afraid to weaponize energy. we have seen it into this lead up. there has been an approach and policy from this administration that says we don't want to put that on the table. i'm sorry, sir. it is on the table and has been put on the table by putin. what can we do to respond? our message should be pretty clear and simple. no more russian energy should come into the united states for the duration of this bloody, horrifying, unprovoked war against ukraine. this measure is in direct response to what russia is doing with the bombing of the schools and hospitals and apartment buildings. forcing the ukrainians to flee their country, killing the innocent who remain, and using

some of the worst weapons in the world indiscriminately to do it. these are not just acts of war, they are war crimes. there should not be a single additional american dollar allowed to find -- allowed to finance these atrocities. the president said i will use every tool in the toolbox. mr. president, this is a tool. the one tool that might just force vladimir putin to pursue peace here. host: that was senator lisa murkowski speaking about energy and russia, that is what we are talking about this hour. we will take your calls. we will start with mode -- with malik in arlington, texas. caller: i would like to inform the panel that the united states does not produce any energy. we pump and refine it.

energy is produced by millions of fossils that takes millions of years to be created. fossilized things over millions of years. if we had pushed for the green new deal renewable energy such as hydroelectric energy, we wouldn't be relying on foreign supplements to supplement our energy crisis in the united states. opec sets the oil prices. we have from supporters claiming we were energy independent, that is propaganda. we have to understand that the united states has only built one new oil refinery in the past 10 years and that is in louisiana. i know a little about the industry and i know it is very much automated. oil and natural gas is a derivative from fossilized things that takes millions of years to be created. this idea that we produce energy, we do not. we pump it and then refine it.

those are two different things. i want the public to know that it takes millions of years to create fossilized fuel. host: christy, a response? charles? guest: i think real energy security is going to take a lot of renewable energy in the united states. what we are seeing, as senator murkowski referenced, is vladimir putin is using fossil fuels and energy as a weapon against the west. until we get to a place where we are really not dependent on fossil fuels we are going to be at the whims of any kind of autocratic leader who wants to use fossil fuels as a weapon. i really think we have to look at this issue both as the short-term needs of our allies and how do we make sure that europeans can get through this winter and have the energy that they need, and what are the longer-term needs of the united

states? how are we going to get to a place over the next 10 years where we are using less and less fossil fuels and we have built up clear, cheaper, renewable energies in the united states? even when it comes to fossil fuel you cannot flip a switch and have rigs put online. we have to be serious about what steps will be taken if we are going to be investing money in producing energy in the united states. what is the right path forward and where are we putting our money so that we are actually addressing climate change at the same time that we are seeking real energy security for the united states? host: bernie and howard beach, new york on the democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. it is my feeling that the united states and the rest of the world is already in a state of war with russia. it is a different kind of war, but it is a war that, if we are

going to be lucky, will be a war of attrition. please, make it a war of attrition rather than kinetic, guns against guns and nuclear weapons against nuclear weapons. that is the philosophy that we've had now, to put all of these sanctions on. and these sanctions should stay on, not for a month or two months or one day the russians capture or leave ukraine, but they should stay on until -- host: bernie, do you have a question about energy? caller: yeah, the point that i'm making is that i'm willing to accept $10 per gallon oil rather than have my son killed. i accept $10 a gallon. especially if it means that russia starves to death.

increasing inflation if it has to be. if we can avoid it, fine, but i'm willing to pay more. host: charles, your comments? guest: where bernie is heading is that we are in a long-term power struggle with russia. we have been for many decades and will continue to be. we need to find a way to have a commonsense climate policy that strengthens our national security. russia is asserting itself in war right now. it is little surprise to many ukrainians who remember in 2006 their gas being shut off in the middle of winter. that was an act of terrorism then and something that folks who have been tracking russia's actions understand that there are adversaries and they are

utilizing weaponizing energy now. we need a strategy that strengthens national security and reduces greenhouse gas emissions. global fossil fuel consumption is expected to increase over 25% over the next three decades. the united states needs to exert itself in a position to be able to supply the world with that energy. if we back away we are simply enriching russia and other geopolitical adversaries who do not have our democratic interests in mind and frankly do not have peace in mind. it is an area that the united states needs to continue as part of the all of the above approach to tackle the climate problem. host: we heard from senator murkowski on the legislation to ban russian energy. let's hear now from the white house press secretary who was with reporters yesterday on friday and was asked about reducing russian oil imports. [video clip] >> options we can take now to

cut u.s. consumption of energy, we are focused on minimizing the impacts to families. if you reduced in the global market price you will raise gas prices, you will raise the price of oil. that is something that the president is very mindful of and focused on. >> there is a review of options that would allow you to cut consumption but maintain market stability and supply. can you outline any of those options in detail? >> there are both international and domestic options. i won't get into too much detail because our focus is on discussing what is possible, what will have the maximum impact and not putting any of them at risk. oddly speaking what we are trying to do internationally is have -- broadly speaking, what we are trying to do internationally is have conversations with oil suppliers about meeting the supply needs in the marketplace.

the reduction of supply, the reduction of oil would raise prices, right? that is one of the things that we have been focused on. we talked a little about engagements, ongoing discussions , there is not a day or an hour that goes by where members of our national security and economic teams are not communicating with their counterparts around the world about this issue. there are also domestic options out there. the president announced the release from the strategic petroleum reserves. that is something where the process is just getting going now. it takes a little bit to get that going. and then he will consider and continue to discuss with his team other steps that we can take domestically. host: let's go next to brooklyn park, minnesota on the independents line. caller: good morning. i lived in russia for five years.

i've been all over ukraine. there are a lot of things that goes into the situation. i believe that the u.s. government has been trying to separate ukraine from russia since joseph stalin died. as a black man it is only one part of those two countries and that was in the western part of ukraine. i think energy is a small part of this, but i do believe that the sanctions and the hardening of parts -- hardening of hearts is the wrong thing. i know russians, they will not back down. what you do not hear on the

media as the ukrainians for years were siphoning gas and oil from the transit pipelines that go from russia to western europe and selling it back to western european countries on the black market and also demanding lower than below-market prices for gas from the russian federation. host: let's get a response. phil brings up europe and the pipelines going to europe. they are more dependent on russian gas and oil men we are. what are your thoughts? -- oil than we are. what are your thoughts? guest: that was one of the announcements why germany's

decision to end the relationship with russia was dramatic and even putin didn't expected germany to come out so forcefully. we are seeing is a commitment to clean energy really expedited their approach to renewables over the past several years. they have their own green new deal that they are implementing. you have that near-term versus long-term challenge. what europe is going to do as they try as hard as they possibly can to wean themselves off of whatever energy sources that they get from russia, they are going to invest billions of dollars in their clean energy resources and look for alternatives in the short-term that can bridge that gap. with liquefied natural gas is one of the options, but again that takes years to build export terminals, years to figure out how you will store it in europe. if you are trying to figure out are you going to take that time

to invest in the renewable resources that you have on the continent in your country, or are you going to invest in more fossil fuel infrastructure that just continues to make you dependent on authoritarian leaders around the world? the option seems fairly easy in the long-term. it is the short-term questions that you heard jen psaki walking through. there are limited options for filling that gap in the short term without pretty powerful price shocks for consumers and families. host: paul in lexington, kentucky on the democrats line. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: i have several comments. first of all i am going to recognize that i am on the democratic line and i am a strong democrat and i think that we need to stay with that. i think our senator from west virginia, joe manchin, i

understand that he wants to represent west virginia. fossil fuel is not the way to go. i know the only real product that they have is colin a little bit of oil. i live -- is coal and a little bit of oil. i live in kentucky. we abandoned c in -- coal in kentucky and west virginia should too. i am all for going green, but with us not in our current situation i think that we need to put an amnesty on our oil production and let them get back to refining and taking care of our oil here that we can drill and refine. now, with that said, i think

that people have a misconception of the keystone pipeline. that wasn't going to produce more oil in the united states. we were going to be exporting almost everything that we piped down. people get upset about the pipeline being closed. that is not a big deal. host: let's get a reaction. charles, he mentioned the keystone pipeline. guest: i think that is a big deal. the keystone pipeline and the uncertainty that investors face due to the back and forth between administration to administration to approve the pipeline. the pipeline is a great disservice to tackling climate change and energy security at the same time. not having the keystone pipeline doesn't stop canada from producing oil and asked from its resources. instead it needs to have a higher environmental footprint

to send that resource by truck over land or by rail at a higher environmental risk. i want to offer the audience one statistic. you can go to my organization's website, we released a white paper on thursday that breaks down the numbers and illustrates that u.s.-produced liquefied natural gas -- pipeline oil shipped in from russia. they can do a great step and check russia's power by turning on more u.s. natural gas, liquefied natural gas that we can and should be shipping more of tim mead that energy need right now. host: christy, your reaction? remind viewers what president

biden did on his first day in office regarding the keystone pipeline. guest: he did announce early on that we would be rejoining the paris agreement and putting the united states back in the game of leadership when it comes to climate change, and he announced that he was not going to continue the permit with the keystone xl pipeline.only 8% of the pipeline has been built now. yes, it is a question of years, not a couple of months in terms of the situation in ukraine and russia. it is worth talking about what it is given the current situation. it is not realistic to say that we will immediately send a bunch of liquefied natural gas to europe. it's not how the market works. we have contracts elsewhere around the world. that is a long-term, not a short-term answer to the situation we are facing. the keystone xl pipeline has

been a hot button issue for a long time. even the supreme court, this conservative supreme court, will not hear the next case so the pipeline is not going to happen. as much as people like to debate it, this has been asked and answered and we need to look at other options for developing ates. again, we want to be in a situation where we are not subject to the whims of autocratic leaders who view fossil fuels as a weapon. we need to look at that long-term mix and invest in clean, renewable forms of energy in the united states to get us out of this game of every single decade having prices go through the roof and consumers and families not know what to expect because we are subject to the whim of the market of fossil fuels. host: joe is in alabama. caller: good morning.

i am not willing to spend $.10 more per gallon until this administration decides to put their effort into getting more oil. they are doing everything that they can to make it hard on anyone who wants fossil fuel. the secretary of energy didn't even know how many barrels of oil the country uses in one day. she also had stock in batteries, a company for batteries for electric cars. they are trying to force everybody to go this green route . until this administration starts trying to pump enough oil for everybody i don't want to pay another dime. host: charles? we are back to what we pay at the pumps.

guest: i am super sympathetic to joe's concerns. we have all felt the pension our wallets, and the unfortunate thing is that we will continue to feel that for a long time. not just at the pump but probably through food products. ukraine is a major exporter of food products to europe to the extent that that needs to be made up to help feed our allies and friends in europe. it is going to cause more shortages in the supply chain in other areas. i think that the point that joe really hammers on is that we need to assure that we have the appropriate supply for demand. right now there is a lot of fossil fuel consuming vehicles on the road. we need a policy on all the above approach that can meet we need to invest more renewables, more in innovation, in energy storage.

we need a and all of the above approach and that does include energy efficiency because it means we'll we will be able to export more energy resources. it is one where the market needs to be able to supply more oil and gas. cjristy is right about the pipe -- christy is right about the pipeline. these were in the works over a decade and it is a challenge because had that pipeline had the consistency envisioned that was needed a decade ago it would have been built by now. we would have had more well produced oil and gas from our allies in canada and we could have been a bigger part of the solution. unfortunately, due to decisions that were made a decade ago, we are not in that position. host: here are the numbers on

u.s. imports from russia for 2021. 245 million barrels of crude and petroleum products came in and nearly 8% of all u.s. crude oil imports coming from russia. martin in dayton, ohio on the independents line. caller: how are you doing? americans are doing the right thing after that existed all other alternatives. hopefully we are smarter now. no one is to blame for this. not trump, not biden, just one man, putin. there has been a sea change in terms of energy. i always voted democratic but i am independent if you are going to label me. i think trump is the worst president mostly because of composure. the thing is i think biden should go on with manchin

immediately and say drill, baby, drill. we are going to need fossil fuels and bridge energies to help europe. we are not in as bad of shape when george w. bush said we are addicted to oil. we are better off than we were then. the problem is europe. they are getting 40% of their energy from putin. that was never going -- why did they think that was a good solution? that is the problem and we are going to need -- they need to find energy from a different place. this war is on everyone's iphone and people are not good to stand for it. host: christy, what is your action? guest: i do not think the president has the power to say drill, baby, drill. 9000 unused permits, six times the amount we needed the last several years. wall street has made very clear

the investors in domestic oil and gas companies what they want is buying down dividends. they are not interested in producing more. ceo after ceo has been on television and tell investors they are not going to change their plans for the coming year no matter how high the price. they are raking in profits they have not seen in a decade and they are very happy with that. if the companies are not going to produce more, there is nothing the president can do currently that is going to produce more energy in the u.s. for europe. these companies have to figure out our investors going to loosen the grip on what needs to happen with these record high profits? are they going to change plans? with that it is going to take months to get any new production online. drill, baby, drill just means we

lock it in more fossil fuel infrastructure for the future. the tools, the leases, the permits are in the hands of companies. if we are going to focus on real energy security for the future, it is not about drill, baby, drill. it is about a clean energy future that gets us out of these swings in the energy market and allows us to truly be in control of our energy resources. host: currently, our prices at the pump going to go up and stay up as long as the war continues? guest: charles said it as well. i think that is what we are looking at. i do expect we are going to see a bipartisan effort to ban russian crude oil from the united states and that will send prices higher. we have to do what we can with the tools available and be honest about who can contribute more and where the bottleneck

is. yes, as long as there is this disruption in the world that is with the oil markets respond to and we will see the price go higher as a result of vladimir putin and have to be clear about who is responsible. host: i wonder what impact that will have on russia. can't they just take that and sell it elsewhere? china, india, other places? guest: it is a global market so yes, they will be able to sell it elsewhere in the world, but this is one of the core commodities standing up the russian economy. the harder it is for them to sell their product, the more impact you will have inside the country. already given the impact of the sanctions the ruble crash, their stock market has stopped trading. whether it gets vladimir putin to change his way is unknown.

he made clear in his conversation with macron from france he will go with this war until he gets everything he wants out of this mission. unfortunately, if he continues with that, all of the rest of us here in the united states are going to suffer the consequences of his actions in our food prices, at the pump, and we see fossil fuels and energy are used as a weapon. host: let's talk to james in ohio on the democrats line. caller: how are you doing? host: good. caller: i have been watching this horrific thing in the soviet union and putin has always been a bully. donald trump was doing clinton's work -- putin's work by trying

to weaken nato. this has been planned for a long time. now we are caught in the quagmire. it is awful to see little babies running for their lives. if we steal a loaf of bread, we go to jail for it. putin is killing innocent people, innocent people, that did nothing to nobody. we are helping but is it enough? host: but what do you think about energy policy? do you think we should do anything about that? caller: yes. i think the energy we get from the soviets, we should cut it out. i know it is going to increase our prices for gasoline but it is a price we have to pay for

making mistakes we have made. someone on c-span earlier said we have nuclear weapons in russia. no, they have more than we have. i thought we had more but we don't. it breaks my heart to see these little babies -- i fought in vietnam and i fought against tyranny like this. i can't believe our representatives in washington, d.c. are playing to putin. that is treason to me. host: we are talking about the impact on russia if we were to cut off imports from russia. what kind of lasting impact do you think this would have on russia's energy sector? guest: hard to predict how it will affect russia's energy sector but i want to echo what

james said. it is horrific. i think there is a real human tragedy not just in ukraine but for a lot of innocent russians that did not want this from the leadership, that don't want war. there are peace loving folk in russia and my heart breaks for the damage being done in their country. my hope is this is a big wake-up call for putin and that u.s. leaders have the moral strength to follow through on what james is talking about, standing up to putin and having the moral strength to stand up to an authoritarian dictator who was willing to do anything to grow his sphere of power and make a land grab out of ukraine. it is that simple. that is where we need to back up u.s. policy. u.s. leaders need to say, we are going to take a position and fight against what is morally wrong. there will be pain at the pump but by taking swift action now we can reduce that pain. over the long-term be able to

make the types of investments we need to reduce our dependency on russian oil and gas. i think what you will see is russia's economy will need to shift and adjust their almost exclusive dependence on gas for earnings. there is also a lot of critical minerals and mining and heavy industrial activities that support their economy. there is going to be a real adjustment for russia to remake its economy. i think it is too early to say what that will look like but it will probably depend on who is in charge and what the power of free markets will have, or not, in terms of being able to reshape russia after all this is done. host: let's talk to randy in new port richey, florida on the independence line. good morning. caller: good morning, america. thank you, c-span, for having a platform without rhetoric or

censorship. i have a couple of statements and then a question for the energy people. the pipeline in alaska has been there for decades and there is no real strong impact with that old technology. i don't see a problem with the keystone pipeline. second of all, the gas prices affect us but if we went to clean energy, it would take even longer to fill our tanks, our batteries. i can fill my tank in three minutes. it takes 40 minutes to fill up my car and not everybody has a house to be able to charge their vehicle. that is a problem. but the question i have is when the strategic oil supply has opened up who gets that oil and

do they pay for it? how does that work? host: ok. which one of you would like to take that question? guest: charles, do you want to take it? guest: in terms of who pays, the u.s. government buys when prices are low and that is the best bet to fill the petroleum reserves. it is the american taxpayer who essentially holds onto oil for exact moments like this when there is a strategic problem or crisis to be able to relieve pressure. it is the right thing to do to release that oil from the strategic reserve. but it is a band-aid not a long-term solution and that is where we need consistent policy and vision for how we can return and have investment in the united states, not just in oil

and gas, but also in renewables, in electric vehicles, so that we can reduce the charging time needed for electric vehicles and see a clean energy future and lower dependency on other countries not just for oil and gas but critical minerals and other elements that are important to maintaining a robust and growing economy at home. host: next up is ron in johnstown, pennsylvania on the democrats line. . caller: good morning. there is information about the xl pipeline. the supreme court confirmed the keystone pipeline cannot be built with the legal battles and losses going on. president biden then killed the project. but there is misinformation about the number of jobs. you hear the number 10,000. there was only 600 jobs involved and they were the same 600 you were going to build the pipeline

all the way down. to houston when it was built more jobs would be created. the tar sands has a toxic component that would've ruined the pipes anyway. the canadians are building a pipeline over to the west coast of canada. they will be pumping and transporting. right now it is transported by rail. it is still being moved some way, somehow but thank goodness. that pipeline would have gone through the aquifers in the united states which would have ruined a lot of water in the area it would be covering. and that area at one time had one of the worst earthquakes in modern history and even changed the course of the mississippi river. that is a bad place to build a pipeline.

that is about all i can say. groups like sierra club in defense of the natural life for filing lawsuits along with native tribes. this thing would have been going on for many years. only 8% of the pipeline as actually built. thank you. host: thank you, ron. christy, your response to ron on environmental impact. guest: yes, ron is right. that is the concern with pipelines, keystone or otherwise. there are lots of leaks, impacts on communities, that is why we see such vehement resistance for building new pipelines. but the reason we are where we are with keystone xl pipeline is it became an incredibly dramatic and hot button issue across the

country. the communities in north dakota and elsewhere were so concerned about their aquifers and were able to make the case ron is making. but this is what we are looking at when we are talking about more fossil fuel development. there is no way to do it. we do it in the united states but it is still a dirty business. you look at the air pollution that is caused as a result of all types of refining and drilling. i mean, the impact is really huge on our environment, not to mention what happens when we consume and use the fossil fuels and add to the climate change around the world. it is absolutely a dirty, dirty fuel that we have to get ourselves off of. we have to break our addiction. not only because the impacts it is having around the world and on our environment but also

because of the tool and weapon it is for authoritarian dictators like the vladimir putin. we just cannot continue to think that we can have energy security while we are still dependent on fossil fuels. i go back to that in this whole conversation. we are not seeing honest arguments from the other side about the role fossil fuels should play right now and in the future if we want to have real energy security in the united states. host: charles, do you have reaction before we take the next call? guest: i think it is important -- there is no free lunch when it comes to any sort of energy development. christy is right. there are pollution challenges with oil and gas development. the question is whether or not we can apply the highest environmental safeguards, retain control. we want to build in our backyard

instead of saying, not in my back yard to every energy project. it is a real challenge. solar panels have a lower environmental impact when they are on the ground in the desert but the amount of mining and environmental impact that is put into creating those xls is substantial. some of those minerals come from china, they come from drc where it is child labor being utilized, or slave labor, being utilized to put those components together or pull out the resources for those components. the question is not is one technology better than the other? we need an all above approach. we need to minimize the impact on every front. you see the oil and gas sector from exxon mobil to shell interested in reducing their footprints from their direct

operations to the electricity they are purchasing. but also reducing emissions and products they sell. that will be a big point. capture carbon dioxide, sequester it underground, these are important tools that can clean up and reduce the impact of fossil fuels. we have so much of the infrastructure built already. so much of the global economy is dependent on it. if we are serious about reducing emissions quickly, we need not to take that option off the table. we need a clear view to make these investments, clean up fossil fuels, and reduce vladimir putin's power, cut off his financing because if we can do that, we will live in a more peaceful and prosperous world. host: let's talk to richard on the republican line calling from athens, tennessee. caller: thank you very much for taking my call. i live in rural america and i'm

going to say an overwhelming majority of the people when they go to turn the light switch on they are not thinking about where it is coming from, they are looking at efficiency of product. the gentleman said the magic words, all of the above. i don't think the people in the beltway actually understand that not everybody lives where there is mass transit or something like that. a lot of people around me, they still drive 20-year-old cars. if we go all electric, which we don't have the infrastructure for right now, and i live in southeast tennessee where we maxed out our hydroelectric facilities. we cannot put any more dams on the rivers. we can build nuclear power but where is all this energy going to come from from green energy?

that is the question. how are we going to produce all of the screen electricity -- green electricity to supply everyone? that is the question. host: christy, what do you think? he wants an all of the above energy policy. guest: his last question of how are we going to produce all the energy we need is what i think is top of mind for many americans and that is why we are looking at this decade as a time of transformation. in the bipartisan infrastructure bill that passed there was a huge amount of money for building out charging infrastructure across the united states. we will need to have more innovation in technology to get where we need to go in terms of clean energy, but it is going to take knowing that is where we are headed, setting those targets, and understanding how much renewable energy we have to build year after year in order to get to that goal. it is not going to happen overnight. just as richard said, there are

all kinds of internal combustion engine vehicles on the road and it takes a very long time for people to turn over their cars. are there incentives that can make it cheaper to get electric vehicles for those who drive and are in a position to be able to purchase one? can we make it cheaper than an internal combustion engine vehicle? this is one of the proposals put forward in the house and has been discussed and passed through one of the committees in the senate, to really look at super sizing investments when it comes to electric vehicles. because, at the end of the day, if we are not going to pump gas into our cars, that is how we shield ourselves from the pain at the pump, by not using the pump. but it is going to take a huge buildout of renewable energy and i want to agree with what charles was commenting on earlier about the amount of materials, critical minerals, in

the real focus we are going to have to have as a world on where those come from. i think one of the most heartening things out of this conflict is how you have seen democratic nations really come together to work together to figure out what are the tools they have available to really isolate russia? while russia is using energy as a weapon those allies can also figure out how to support each other in terms of the advancement of technology we will need to make this transition, support each other in really whether you are looking at trade or how we account for carbon in a global society. there are like-minded nations who have the same in mind when it comes to energy that can support each other. because it is going to take a huge transition and we are looking at that for at least this decade and beyond to

switch the scales so we have far more renewable energy and get to the middle of the century where we are close to almost all of our energy coming from clean sources. that is what the science tells us we need to do when we are looking at how are we going to address climate change? then you bring into the mix geopolitical unrest and it becomes an even bigger accelerant for us to make the switch. and for the world and countries really serious about tackling climate change this is even greater motivation to get ourselves off oil and gas and look at how we are going to have enough electricity to power everybody's homes and the growing population of the world. host: we will stay in tennessee this time to nashville. richard is on the independent line. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: i can remember as a child growing up the russians. i remember what crude told us

when i was little boy, they are coming. either they are coming loudly like they are in the ukraine or silently. but when it comes to the oil, have you ever been to beaumont, texas, houston, texas, louisiana? go to long beach, california outside l.a. and look at the refineries. oil, we think of it and most americans think of it as we use it in our cars. we might use it in our housing to heat our homes. but let's talk about what oil really is, it is a petroleum product. what do we get from petroleum? oil. we paid our roads. all that blacktop is made from petroleum, certain medicines, certain foods, a lot is made from petroleum that you cannot cut off overnight. when we look at changing the oil situation, let's just stop using oil, don't import nothing, i

think the problem -- host: charles, do you want to respond to that? guest: sure. i think the caller is right. there are some bad guys out there in the world and they do not have our best interest in mind. we need to have the strength to call out the bad actors and do what it takes to make folks believe and understand the united states will be a leader in energy security and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and re-create the feeling of american exceptionalism and win over hearts and minds by standing strongly in strong opposition to authoritarians like vladimir putin and others around the world. and do the investments it takes to reduce emissions from oil and gas, from the electric power sector. there is no shortage of opportunity.

we need the all of the above approach. government should not be in the position of picking winners and losers. we need to empower the marketplace to be able to make those decisions. christy flagged important market trends and where folks are headed but we also need those trends to not be clouded by the regulatory regime and how it might change from administration to administration, but to have congress step up and send clear signals the united states will innovate and create opportunities for american businessmen and women to make money and export their technologies abroad to provide energy security, reduce greenhouse gases. we can do both at the same time. host: that will be the last word . charles hernick and christy goldfuss, thank you for joining us today. guest: thank you for having me. guest: thank you. host: up next, more of your calls on open forum. we take your calls for 15 minutes and then we will have

our spotlight saturday on podcasts. it is "war on the rocks" host ryan evans to discuss the invasion of ukraine and his podcast on strategy, defense and foreign affairs. we will be right back. ♪ ♪ announcer: sunday on q&a, speechwriter donna rubin talks about the speech bank, an online archive to preserve speeches by women that, in her opinion, have been overlooked or forgotten. the archive includes those by queen elizabeth ii, barbara jordan. >> it is only in recent times we have credited at all or paid attention to what women had to say and we have a large general cultural assumption women were not the best speakers, that

women were not speaking, that women were silent. in general, it is true that women did not speak as much as men for a variety of reasons but it is not true they were not speaking. in fact, women have been speaking, hundreds of them, thousands of them, but we have not had access to their words. announcer: donna rubin sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's q&a. you can listen to q&a and all of our ♪ >> the book, "hitler's american gamble" describes five days that upended everything including december 7 through december 11, 1941 from the attack on pearl harbor to the declaration of war on the united states. tracing development in real-time, historians reveal how

america's engagement was far from inevitable. the professors quote the late church biographer martin gilbert saying "hitler's decision to declare war on the united states was "arguably its single greatest mistake of the war." >> british historians brendan sims and charlie lederman on this episode of book notes plus, available on the free c-span now app or wherever you get your podcast. ♪ c-span offers a variety of podcasts and something for every listener. washington today gives you the latest from the nation's capital and every week, book notes plus has in-depth interviews with writers about their latest works , while the weekly uses audio from our archive to look at how issues of the day developed over the years. talking with experience --

features conversations with historians in their work. any television programs are available as podcasts on the c-span now mobile app or wherever you got your podcasts. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back to "washington journal," open forum for about 15 minutes. we will take your phone calls on anything public policy wise you want to weigh in on. the war in ukraine husband going on at also the jobs number came out -- has been going on and also the jobs numbers came out. the economy making post-pandemic pivots, employers added 678,000 workers to their payrolls in february, the biggest gain in seven months. that's out from the labor

department yesterday. the jobless rate fell from 3.8% -- to 3.8% from 4%, edging closer to the 50 year low of 3.5% it just before the pandemic. also, "the washington post" talks about the jobs recovery in sight and says -- "the u.s. economy created a blockbuster $678,000 -- thousand dollar josh jobs in -- also in the news is the ongoing war in ukraine. here is "the wall street journal." this headline is "ukraine's special forces stymie russia on keeps front lines are come -- kyiv's front lines are come russian forces have tried to

fight their way through kyiv to reach the capital and every day ukrainian forces have caused them to retreat. the quote is from a member of the special forces to -- team -- we go out to serve -- search and hunt them. they didn't expect that we know how to fight. your views on that, democrats can call us on (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. and independents (202) 748-8002. john is in euclid, ohio, the republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i was kind of hoping that those two people were still on the energy thing. i'd like to say that to look for

the root causes of our energy problem, it's -- if biden did not touch anything that had to do with what was going on at the time, we would have been still energy independent to this point. now understanding that to go green is going to take years, is going to take years and years to convert to electric. which is ok, but in the meantime, if we were energy independent we wouldn't have this problem with buying oil from russia or anywhere else. so my feeling is biden really screwed up. host: here's my question. you said it's going to take years and years to have green energy so shouldn't we start now? caller: well, listen, he already started.

they have already started with the windmills and all of these things. how long will it take to put 150,000 electric stations throughout the united states? it is just no way. this was a big mistake from the start. nothing you can do about -- but what you can do about it now is turn on the oil. turn on our oil, get it going. the keystone pipeline, there's all this controversy but -- by the way, the 9000 and the federal lands that they say that the companies aren't doing anything -- the leases on the land. well, there's no incentive. there's a lot of what do you call them, i don't know what you call them. all i can say is he should have

left it alone. his executive orders to cut all this out started this problem. has nothing to do with russia, nothing to do with ukraine. they should have just left it alone and we wouldn't have had this energy problem today. and just continue doing the green thing. keep our energy that we have. frankly, i don't think that that green energy, i don't think those windmills and all that other stuff is going to cause a lot of problems. host: allen in wisconsin on the democrats line. what do you think? caller: a comment, i did want to thank c-span. i was going to speak to jen psaki and the people making decisions for us. i think she said the other day

that the reason she and the government thinks they didn't want to shut off oil and gas from russia was because it would hurt the american people. but i think on day one, the president hurt the american people by shutting off the canadian pipeline. that's my comment. thank you, ma'am. have a good day. host: we have some breaking news to share with you from "the wall street journal" -- ukraine/russia agreement on evacuating civilians collapses. the agreement between russia and ukraine on evacuating civilians from the besieged cities collapsed on saturday -- today -- as kyiv accused moscow of violating the agreements

cease-fire and resuming attacks on residential areas. some 200,000 civilians were expected to start leaving and 15,000 from eastern ukraine at 9:00 a.m. eastern time. the deal was overseen by the international community of the red cross but at 11:45, russia resumed shelling with heavy weapons while also continuing military operations on the route leading out of the city according to ukraine's deputy prime minister. laura in austin, texas, on the independent line. caller: good morning. i want to immediately give a shout out to to the ukrainian people. i am a descendant of czechoslovakian immigrants to this country and what is going on in ukraine has hit me very hard because my family left

czechoslovakia to get away from garbage like this. i feel for the ukrainian people. i just am devastated by the pictures i see on the media. first of all, diplomacy is not going to work on putin. pruden is a sociopath and may even be a psychopath. as such, he does not care how many people he kills to get what he wants and what he wants is access to black sea oil reserves. he wants to take ukraine back, doesn't care how many people he has to kill or if he starts world war iii. the only way to hit him where he lives is to fast-track lisa murkowski's bill, as a democrat who leans independent i am behind her 100%. jen psaki can suck it.

host: you don't think it would be a big deal for us to pay more at the pump? you are willing to make that sacrifice? caller: a percent of our energy reserves, and if american taxpayer dollars go to fund the russian incursion into ukraine, it needs to stop right now. host: rich in marion, ohio, on the republican line. caller: a lot of good opinions. it seems like it is a really complicated problem we've gotten ourselves into. luckily, some countries are trying it out, the green new deal. germany gave up their atomic power plants and are trying windmills and things like that and are putting themselves in jeopardy of russian taking them over. -- russia taking them over. we fought 40 years to be energy independent when saudi arabia shut us off.

we learned we have to be energy independent. we had the means to get their year ago and we lost it within 12 months, which is reality of these countries, why energy independence isn't just paying another dollar for gas. it's not having to put up with dictators and buy stuff from them which we get sucked into every time. name a country they are trying to jacked us up over the oil. the other problem we have this up until 9/11, two countries would pick that they didn't want to go to war because they would blow each other up, the u.s. and russia, and we both agreed. we had the same country that not because they liked us, they wanted retaliation. it is not just going to be one country, it is going to be thousands of these countries that are going to do this stuff.

we have to figure out a way to handle dictators because when they get in power and we give them war, it makes them more alike because they are getting what they want. the deal with china and russia was that we would help them get technologically smart, but for that, they had to go by certain rules. both countries ignored the rules . these rules are really important. they say, that's fine, we want to do this, but don't throw us out of the wto. it doesn't go that way and when we put up with it, this is the result we get. the only way to solve this is to help all the countries get rid of their dictators. i don't know how we do that. host: we will take another call from ohio, poppy on the democrats line. caller: hello.

listen, i'm not against green energy but i think i have an idea that would help this country a lot. i think what we ought to do is people are talking about drilling on federal lands. pick certain areas where it is not heavily populated with people, tourists, etc., but the government own the oil, the people, us, not the oil companies which will take over, pay maybe a little lease fee and then gouge us all over again. why don't we just own it ourselves? don't let exxon mobil gouge us like they are doing right now. another thing, you people ought to understand one thing. jen psaki is a messenger. why are you attacking her? she's just a messenger.

so anyway that's how i feel. host: our last call for this segment is janice in the louisiana on the democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. i think russia's gas and oil situation is separate from the ukraine's situation. europe and the united states need -- it's convenient to have russian gas and oil at this time. but also we need to consider climate change. all of us on earth have to care for each other. not only for gas and oil, but our air and water. i have different comments i'd like to make about the ukraine and russia situation but i don't

know if you want to hear that. host: you can quickly. if you can be brief. caller: ukraine somehow left russia after world war ii when russia lost over 20 million people. and formed a separate country. russia didn't do anything -- who was in charge? i don't remember. this reminds me of our civil war when the south of america withdrew from the union. it was the south against the north and russia now is the east against the west. we should stay out and just watch if they don't attack our allies in nato. now russia is having a civil war. just help with the refugees trying to leave. that's all i have to say.

host: we appreciate everybody that called in. up next in our weekly spotlight on podcast segment, we will be talking about war on the rocks. ryan evans will join us to discuss the russian invasion of ukraine and his podcast on strategy, defense, and foreign affairs. we will be right back. ♪ >> next week on the c-span networks, the house and senate are in washington, d.c. to work on passing a bill to fund the government for friday's midnight deadline. the senate plans to vote on a postal reform bill and consider the nomination of texas sheriff and gonzales as director of u.s. immigrations and custard enforcement -- customs enforcement. on c-span3, the top agents of the u.s. intelligence on the

threats facing the u.s. and its allies. the senate foreign relations committee joins to meet russia and ukraine and the international response. on the c-span.org, and c-span now, our app, testimony continues before the senate intelligence community about national and global threats. watch on c-span networks, c-span now, or c-span.org for scheduling information or to stream video live or on-demand anytime. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. president biden: the russian military has begun a brutal assault on the people of ukraine without provocation, without justification, without necessity . this is a premeditated attack.

>> c-span has unfiltered coverage of the u.s. response to russia's invasion of ukraine, bringing you the latest from the president and white house officials, the pentagon and state department, as well as congress. we have international perspectives from the united nations and statements from foreign leaders. all on the c-span networks, online at c-span.org, or on the free c-span now mobile video app. ♪ >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what's happening in washington live and on-demand. keep up at the biggest events. white house events, the courts, campaigns, and more from the world of politics, all at your fingertips. to help you stay current with the latest episodes of "washington journal" and scheduling of tv networks and

radio, plus compelling podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store and google play free. c-span now, your front row seat to washington, anytime, anywhere. ♪ >> c-span's new american president's new american presidents website is your one-stop guide to our nations commanders in chief, from george washington to joe biden. find short biographies, video references, and facts that tell the stories of their lives and presidency. visit c-span.org/presidents to begin exploring this rich catalog of c-span resources today. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back. it's our saturday spotlight on podcast