Advertise on podcast: Energy Gang

This year’s Climate Week NYC was about much more than climate. The conversation kept being pulled back to energy security and resilience in an increasingly volatile world. The conflict in the Middle East, drone attacks on critical infrastructure, and threats to international shipping are forcing policymakers, companies and investors to confront one of the toughest questions in energy: how do you build a system that can absorb shocks without pushing costs even higher for consumers? In this special live edition of Energy Gang, recorded in front of invited audience at NYU in New York, host Ed Crooks is joined by regular contributor Amy Myers Jaffe and three guests with very different vantage points on that question. Neil Brown is a managing director at KKR. Anna Shpitsberg is Wood Mackenzie’s head of global power and renewables research. And Dr Sarah Kapnick is global head of climate advisory at JPMorgan. Together they explore how geopolitics, technology and climate risk are colliding to reshape the energy agenda. Neil argues that the attacks on Gulf infrastructure mark a strategic break with the past: energy systems are no longer exposed only to familiar market risks, but to cheaper, more agile weaponry that can inflict outsized damage. He makes the case that the Gulf states have shown real resilience through defence spending, sovereign capital and economic diversification, but warns that energy markets may be entering a prolonged era of instability, rather than a temporary shock. Sarah argues that resilience now means more than access to fuel: it means the ability to keep supplying energy through geopolitical, technological and climate volatility. Anna points to Ukraine’s experience to show why distributed systems can recover faster than large centralised assets, while also stressing that resilience is not the same as self-sufficiency. Building a more secure system may require domestic capacity, strategic partnerships, and industrial policy. Those things all cost money, at a time when affordability pressures are already intense. Volatility is endemic to the energy industry. Political, economic and technological shocks have created dramatic swings in energy markets for centuries. But the combination of a new era of international conflict with world-changing breakthroughs in AI is creating challenges that are genuinely new. The result is a more complex energy system with fewer easy answers: decentralisation can reduce single points of failure but create new cyber risks; trade policy can support domestic manufacturing but raise prices; and climate policy becomes much harder to sustain when voters no longer feel they can afford the transition. The risks from climate change have not gone away. But they will have to be addressed along with more urgent questions about whether energy systems can stay secure and durable in a more dangerous world.   This episode of Energy Gang is brought to you by ENGIE, the smarter energy supplier. ENGIE doesn't just provide the power to run your business — they supply the energy to move it forward, with reliable, flexible solutions built for what's next. Learn more at engieresources.com. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

A fresh shock to global energy markets has pushed an old question back to the center of the climate debate: When supplies tighten and prices rise, do governments double down on the transition, or reach for the fastest fossil fix? From the Strait of Hormuz to rising demand for cooling, the pressure is no longer just about fuel availability. It is about whether power systems can stay secure and affordable while demand keeps climbing and decarbonisation deadlines get closer. In this special Climate Week NYC episode, host Ed Crooks is joined by Damilola Ogunbiyi, CEO and Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General for Sustainable Energy for All, Kayte O’Neill, chief executive of the UK’s National Energy System Operator (NESO), and David Calabrese, Executive Vice President at Daikin US Corporation. Together, they test whether efficiency, electrification and long-term system planning can offer a credible response to a crisis that is global, political and increasingly shaped by both AI and air-conditioning demand. Damilola argues that the discussion cannot be reduced to a rich-world debate about prices and reliability. Nearly 600 million people still lack access to electricity, and 2.4 billion do not have access to clean cooking. In that context, the real risk is not simply a temporary return to fossil fuels in advanced economies, but a much larger lock-in of diesel and petrol generation across emerging markets. Her case is that energy access and energy transition have to move together, supported by integrated national plans, targeted finance and more support for clean distributed systems such as solar, storage and inverters. Kayte makes the case that decarbonisation and system reliability are not competing goals if the grid is planned properly. She points to the UK’s progress in moving away from coal, its high share of renewable generation, and the growing importance of demand flexibility as new loads arrive. With data centres and cooling demand reshaping power curves, the question is not only how much new generation gets built, but how intelligently demand can respond. David brings that argument down to the appliance level, arguing that heat pumps, inverter compressors and more efficient cooling systems can cut energy use while also helping the grid by acting as flexible load rather than blunt spikes in demand. What ties the discussion together is a shared insistence that the short term cannot be separated from the long term. Crisis management that relies only on more supply risks entrenching the very vulnerabilities the energy transition is supposed to solve. But a clean system will not build itself: it needs policy support, workforce training, flexibility, and capital that reaches the places where future demand growth will be greatest. That is the real stakes question for policymakers now, not whether to choose between security, affordability and net zero, but whether they can still design systems that deliver all three. This episode of Energy Gang is brought to you by ENGIE, the smarter energy supplier. ENGIE doesn't just provide the power to run your business — they supply the energy to move it forward, with reliable, flexible solutions built for what's next. Learn more at engieresources.com. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

As federal support for climate action in the US is cut back, a difficult question is coming into focus: what happens to clean-energy projects that still make economic sense, but no longer have Washington behind them? For low-income communities in particular, this is not just a policy story. It is about electricity bills, resilience during storms and heatwaves, access to financing, and whether practical projects such as solar, storage, and efficiency upgrades can still get built. Host Ed Crooks is joined by Amir Kirkwood, Chief Executive of the Justice Climate Fund, and Melanie Allen, Chief Executive of the Hive Fund for Climate and Gender Justice. Together, they explain how a network of community lenders, philanthropies, green banks and local partners is trying to keep momentum alive even as federal climate funding is frozen, litigated or wound back. A central theme of the conversation is that the real constraint is not just ideology or even demand for clean energy, but the structure of finance. Amir argues that many community projects do not need breakthrough technology so much as access to affordable capital and better risk sharing. His case is that catalytic tools such as credit enhancements, loan-loss reserves and blended capital can still unlock much larger pools of private investment, even if they cannot fully replace the scale of federal support that the Inflation Reduction Act was meant to provide. Melanie brings that argument down to ground level with examples of what those projects look like in practice. In Texas, local “hub homes” equipped with solar panels and batteries are giving neighbourhoods places to charge phones, run medical devices and stay cool during outages. In North Carolina, a stalled solar project for a wastewater facility was revived through a mix of local partnership and creative financing. In Georgia, a church cut its monthly energy bill sharply after installing solar, storage and EV charging. Across those examples, the point is the same: in many communities, clean energy is advancing less as an abstract climate commitment than as a practical answer to affordability, reliability and local resilience. That tension between climate ambition and kitchen-table economics runs through the entire discussion. Both guests argue that people move first for pocketbook reasons, and that the strongest case for these investments is often lower bills, stronger community institutions and better protection against system shocks. The politics may have changed in Washington, but the local need for cheaper, more reliable energy has not. In that sense, the conversation suggests that the next phase of US climate action may be driven less by federal grants and more by the ability to assemble credible local deals that solve several problems at once. But Melanie and Amir are also clear-eyed about the limits of that approach. Philanthropy can be catalytic, not substitutive. Tax-credit changes, direct-pay deadlines and higher supply-chain costs are all making projects harder to close. The question, then, is whether this emerging blend of community finance and private capital can keep enough projects moving to prove the model at scale. What is at stake is not only the pace of decarbonisation, but whether the benefits of the energy transition will still reach the communities that need them most. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Electricity markets are under renewed pressure. Surging demand forecasts from data centres and other large loads are colliding with anxiety over reliability, rising consumer bills, and the pace of new investment. In markets such as PJM and ERCOT, those tensions are turning an arcane debate about market design into a live political question: can competitive power markets still deliver affordable, reliable electricity in a period of rapid growth? Host Ed Crooks and regular contributor Amy Myers Jaffe are joined by Stacey Doré, Chief Strategy and Sustainability Officer and Executive Vice President for Public Affairs at Vistra, one of the largest competitive power producers and retailers in the US. Drawing on Vistra’s growth from Texas utility successor to multi-state owner of gas, nuclear, coal, solar and battery assets, Stacey makes the case for competitive markets as the best way to drive efficient investment, innovation and customer value. The discussion starts with a challenge to the dominant narrative around load growth. Stacey argues that some of the most eye-catching forecasts for new demand are overstated by speculative projects and duplicative queue requests, and that the grid already has enough existing generation to serve most near-term growth for the vast majority of hours in the year. In her view, the real bottleneck is not an absolute lack of power, but the failure to connect new load to the grid quickly enough, alongside delays in transmission, distribution and interconnection processes. Are competitive markets sending the right signals to build what is needed next? Stacey says yes, pointing to rising capacity and energy prices in PJM, bilateral contracts with large customers, and a wave of announced investment in new and upgraded generation. She argues that the better near-term solution is not to force every new large load to wait for one-for-one new generation, but to connect customers faster, use co-location where possible, and rely on demand flexibility, backup generation and storage to manage the system’s few true peak-stress hours. Amy pushes on the consumer side of the equation. Even if competition can work, who pays when prices rise, and are current cost-allocation rules fair to households? The conversation digs into the distinction between wholesale generation costs and the rapidly rising transmission and distribution portion of electricity bills, with Stacey arguing that getting more large loads onto the grid would help spread fixed system costs more broadly. Amy counters that cost allocation may be the first reform policymakers need to tackle if they want to protect residential customers while accommodating a new wave of industrial and data-centre demand. What emerges is less a simple argument for or against deregulation than a sharper question about what the grid actually needs now: faster interconnection, better load forecasting, clearer price signals, and a more honest debate about who should bear system costs. Whether policymakers double down on competition, let regulated utilities build more rate-based generation, or rethink cost allocation altogether, the stakes are clear: keeping the grid reliable while bringing on new demand without pushing affordability further out of reach. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

AI is turning compute into a strategic resource, and the scramble to secure GPU capacity is starting to look a lot more like a commodity market than a traditional cloud-services business. As data-centre developers, lenders and energy companies try to price the next wave of AI demand, a new question is coming into focus: Can the industry build the kind of benchmark and hedging tools that already exist for oil, gas and power?  Host Ed Crooks is joined by Peter Keavey, Global Head of Energy and Environmental Products at CME Group, and Carmen Li, Founder and CEO of Silicon Data. Together, they explore the case for a futures market in GPU compute: a financial product designed to bring more transparency, liquidity and risk management to one of the fastest-growing corners of the AI economy. Carmen explains how the market works today. Most users are not buying chips outright; they are renting access to GPU capacity by the hour, often through longer-term agreements with hyperscalers, neo-cloud providers and data-centre operators. That market is already large, global and increasingly active, but it remains fragmented and opaque, with prices varying by provider, chip type and contract structure, and much of the trading still happening through bilateral deals and requests for quotes. Peter sets out the logic for moving from that over-the-counter world to an exchange-traded one. In his view, a GPU futures contract could do three things at once: reduce counterparty risk through central clearing, concentrate liquidity in a transparent order book, and create forward benchmark prices the wider market can use. The proposed product is financially settled against an index of spot prices, translating an hourly rental market into a standardised monthly contract that could eventually extend several years forward. The bigger issue, though, is energy. Power is not the whole cost of GPU compute, but it is the most volatile variable input, which means a GPU hedge could eventually sit alongside gas and power hedges for data-centre operators, lenders and infrastructure investors. The discussion keeps returning to what that means for markets such as Texas and Virginia, where the AI build-out is already shaping decisions on generation, grid access and where capital should go next. Both guests stress that this is still a young market, but already a volatile one. Rental rates have swung sharply as chip scarcity eases and then tightens again, while banks, traders and developers are trying to make long-dated decisions without a reliable forward curve. If this market develops the way Keavey and Li expect, GPU futures would not just serve traders: they could become an important signal for anyone trying to judge how durable the AI boom really is, and how much energy the system will need to support it. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In the AI revolution, one of the critical constraints is how much additional electricity can be made available to power new data centers. And it is often argued that one of the key constraints on the growth of electricity supply is capacity in the equipment supply industry. The rate at which electricity supply can grow is determined in part by how fast the equipment industry can supply new turbines, transformers, switchgear and circuit breakers. In this episode Roger Martella, Chief Corporate Officer and Chief Sustainability Officer at GE Vernova, one of the world’s largest suppliers of electrical equipment, joins the show to explain how the company is meeting the challenge of soaring demand. Roger talks to host Ed Crooks and regular contributor Melissa Lott, Partner for Energy at Microsoft, about his route from industrial Pennsylvania to the leadership team at GE, via the Environmental Protection Agency. And he explains why, when the old conglomerate GE broke up, he chose to go with the energy business. The company is driven by a sense of purpose, he says: bringing electricity to the world both raises living standards and supports decarbonization. Electricity demand growth created by new data centers for AI is one driver for GE Vernova's rapidly growing order book, but not the only one. The company is also responding to other sources of growing demand around the world, including the need to strengthen energy security in Europe and to support economic growth and development in emerging Asia. In the US, GE Vernova has announced $1.3 billion in investment and 1,800 new manufacturing jobs, to support expanded production of switchgear, circuit breakers and turbines. It plans to increase its turbine manufacturing capacity from 18 gigawatts a year to 30 gigawatts a year by 2030. Roger rejects the idea that equipment supplies are the main bottleneck restricting electricity supply growth. Other issues, including permitting and grid interconnections, are more fundamental difficulties for project developers. If anyone has built a turbine stand, but doesn’t have a turbine to out on it, he says, he will find a turbine. Ed raises the issue of the industry's cyclicality. The gas turbine market has been through boom and bust in the past, and the uncertainty over the future of AI naturally raises the question of whether we are in another bubble today. Roger’s answer is that the company is looking at the range of needs that are driving electrification, not making a bet solely on AI. As its production increases, GE Vernova needs to hire more workers. Roger, Ed and Melissa discuss the familiar consensus around skilled trades. Just about everyone agrees that America and other countries need more electricians, plumbers and welders to deloiver the build-out of infrastructure. But skills shortages persist. So what are the solutions that would actually increase the workforce in these sectors to meet demand? Are pay, job security, training and the status of industrial work being addressed in the right ways? One of the more exciting technologies for meeting electricity demand in the 2030s and beyond is the new generation of nuclear plants using small modular reactors (SMRs). GE Vernova has a new nuclear plant using SMRs under construction at Darlington in Ontario, and is targeting commercial operation by 2030. Ed pushes on the key question: can SMRs move from a promising concept to a repeatable, cost-competitive business? Roger says the first project has to be a proof point. The nuclear business cannot be run as a hobby, he says. The lessons from the first-of-a-kind Darlington plant must be used to drive down costs for subsequent units. The discussion also covers High-Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) transmission and cutting-edge technologies for grid management, including uses for drones and AI. Roger ends with a message to policymakers: the missing ingredient is policy durability. If the industry is to invest enough to meet long-term needs, it has to have policy frameworks that survive political cycles, court challenges and changes of administration. This episode of Energy Gang is brought to you by ENGIE, the smarter energy supplier. ENGIE doesn't just provide the power to run your business — they supply the energy to move it forward, with reliable, flexible solutions built for what's next. Learn more at engieresources.com. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

As the renewable energy and storage industries grow, and enter more hostile geographies, asset resilience is becoming an increasingly pressing concern. Developers, owners and lenders want to know how solar, storage and other facilities can increase their resilience to the growing risks of physical threats such as hailstorms and wildfires. The rush to add capacity to meet surging demand from new data centres is adding to the pressure, making calculations about the value of asset reliability increasingly complex. In this special episode, host Ed Crooks speaks with Mike Perron, Renewable Energy Market Lead at FM, and Cassian Walker, Operations Vice President and Renewables Engineering Manager at FM, one of the world’s largest commercial property insurers. They explain how insurers are starting to build resilience into renewable project design far earlier in the development process, and why that has become a financing issue as much as a technical one. For solar power, that means understanding the inherent physical risks such as hail, then deciding what combination of tracker systems, stowing technology and panels is right for the location. The same equipment that performs adequately in California or New Jersey can become a major liability in Texas or Arizona. Cassian explains how modern trackers can tilt panels away from an incoming storm to turn a direct hit into a glancing blow. Mike contrasts a devastating nine-figure loss at one Texas site with a far smaller loss at another facility that successfully stowed. Those resilience strategies can work only if the system is designed for the local wind and hail conditions, and the performance of the equipment has been tested and verified. From there, the conversation broadens to the economics. Insurance can account for a large share of a project’s operating costs, and lenders are asking harder questions about resilience before they finance new builds. FM’s case is that better engineering, better hazard modelling and earlier involvement from insurers and independent engineers can lower lifetime risk and improve financial performance, even if they raise up-front costs. Today, renewable developers still often treat insurance as a late-stage procurement exercise, after key technology decisions have already been locked in. Mike and Cassian argue that that is changing, but the industry is still early in that learning curve. As renewables become more important to the power system, those questions will only get harder to avoid. This episode of Energy Gang is sponsored by FM. As one of the world's leading commercial property insurers, FM combines engineering expertise, scientific research, and data-driven insights to help organizations understand, mitigate, and prevent loss before it occurs. From utility-scale solar and battery storage projects to thermal power generation, manufacturing operations, and other critical infrastructure, FM helps organizations build stronger, more resilient businesses.  To learn more about FM's engineering-based approach to resilience, visit FM.com. For additional insights on risk, resilience, and business continuity, subscribe to FM's Sound Policy podcast.  FM. Protect Your Purpose See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Gas is back at the center of the energy debate. Surging demand for electricity to power new data centres, and growing fears about global energy security resulting from the conflict in the Middle East, are raising some urgent questions for the US gas industry. Consumers want to know whether the US can produce enough gas for the world without losing the price advantage that has benefited American consumers for many years? Can a new era of gas growth strengthen energy security abroad and support cutting-edge technological innovation at home, while also maintaining affordability for most Americans? Host Ed Crooks and regular contributor Amy Myers Jaffe of NYU are joined by Toby Rice, Chief Executive of EQT, one of the largest natural gas producers in the US. Toby argues that America has the resources both to meet rising domestic demand and to supply much more gas to international markets, without sending prices soaring. He sets out EQT’s case for US gas to drive growth, affordability, reliability and geopolitical influence. He also makes the case for the environmental benefits of gas as a replacement for coal in power generation. The Trump administration often talks about “energy dominance”. Toby says. He prefers to describe the goal as “energy abundance”. US gas prices have been low by international standards for most of the past 20 years. The big question is whether that price advantage can persist, in the face of rising LNG exports and growing power demand from AI. Ed raises the prospect that continued growth in demand for gas could eventually push up domestic prices, weakening one of the US economy’s biggest competitive advantages. Toby’s answer is that the shale resource base is deep enough to respond. He argues that at the right price signal, producers can bring on enough supply to support both the domestic market and a much larger export system. He also makes the case that increased US LNG export capacity can strengthen American energy security by creating more flexibility in times of stress, rather than simply exposing Americans to global volatility.  Amy highlights the increased global focus on energy security. If countries are becoming more anxious about imported energy after recent geopolitical shocks, will they still want more LNG, even if it comes from a reliable supplier such as the US? Or will they step up investment in domestic alternatives, including renewables, batteries, nuclear, and even coal? Finally, Toby talks about his work with Energy Corps, the nonprofit organization he founded to bring energy abundance to emerging markets. It aims to deploy technologies including renewables, gas and propane for clean cooking, to increase access to modern energy, and demonstrate ways to improve the quality of life for billions of people around the world. More information about Energy Corps is available at its website: www.energycorps.com   This episode of Energy Gang is brought to you by ENGIE, the smarter energy supplier. ENGIE doesn't just provide the power to run your business — they supply the energy to move it forward, with reliable, flexible solutions built for what's next. Learn more at engieresources.com. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

US electricity prices are rising at well above the general rate of inflation. The data center investment boom, by adding to electricity demand, points to further upward pressure in the future. Consumers are feeling the strain, and they want politicians and regulators to do something about it. One proposed solution is that the rules around competitive power markets need radical reform. In this episode, the Energy Gang looks at PJM, the largest power market in the US, and debates a possible way to add to electricity supplies without pushing bills even higher. Host Ed Crooks and regular contributor Amy Myers Jaffe of NYU are joined by Carim Khouzami, Executive Vice President for Transmission and Development at Exelon, one of the largest US utility groups. Carim explains why the landscape of the US power industry has changed fundamentally over the past five years: electricity demand is rising at a pace the sector has not seen in decades, driven by data centres, electrification, and broader economic growth. And that demand surge is colliding with an electricity system that was designed for a very different era. Competitive markets such as PJM were meant to bring down costs for consumers and send the right signals to the industry for new investment. But Carim argues that in many markets, those signals are no longer working as intended. Customers are seeing higher bills and the reliability of the system is under threat. Reserve margins are getting tighter, and the industry is struggling to bring new generation online quickly enough. PJM offers one of the clearest examples of how those tensions are playing out. The region is grappling with soaring demand, especially from data centres, while trying to manage affordability and reliability at the same time. Carim, Amy and Ed explore why PJM has raised concerns with among state governors, federal regulators and the White House. And they explain why its challenges echo similar problems elsewhere. The central issue is about the market structures that will be best able to meet those challenges in the future. How can the next wave of infrastructure can be built in ways that support both the reliability and the affordability of electricity supplies? Carim makes the case that regulated utilities such as Exelon, which are often prevented by state rules from owning generation capacity, should be allowed to run their own power plants.  His proposal opens up a wider debate about the future of power markets and electricity systems generally. There is plenty of evidence that competitive markets have delivered benefits for consumers. But can they meet the needs of the new world of AI-driven demand growth? And if not, is utility ownership of power plants the right solution? Amy highlights the risks of overbuilding new power plants, and asks whether alternative solutions such as batteries are being given a fair chance to compete. Carim defends his proposal as the best way to secure reliability and value for customers. The current model is not working, he says, and reform is now the best option. PJM, as it has operated until now, may not be ready for the demands that AI, electrification and the energy transition are about to place on it. Politicians and regulators across the US and around the world will be watching to see how it responds. This episode of Energy Gang is brought to you by ENGIE, the smarter energy supplier. ENGIE doesn't just provide the power to run your business — they supply the energy to move it forward, with reliable, flexible solutions built for what's next. Learn more at engieresources.com. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The old joke about nuclear fusion power is that commercial deployment is 30 years in the future: it always has been and it always will be. It may be time to retire that joke. Private fusion companies have now raised billions in capital, and pilot plants are moving from slide decks and plans into steel and concrete. The questions now are not so much around whether fusion power can ever work, and more about how soon it can reach the grid, and at what cost Host Ed Crooks and regular contributor Amy Myers Jaffe, director of the Global Energy, Climate, & Sustainability Lab at NYU are joined by two fusion industry leaders to discuss the rapid progress they are making. Andrew Holland is founder and chief executive of the Fusion Industry Association, and Bob Mumgaard is chief executive of Commonwealth Fusion Systems, one of the companies vying to have the first commercial fusion power plant in operation. Andrew lays out the state of the sector. There are 56 private fusion companies globally, which between them have raised more than $14 billion in private capital. And there is a growing conviction inside the industry that commercial fusion could arrive in the early 2030s. Bob explains why Commonwealth believes SPARC, its demonstration project in Massachusetts, and ARC, its planned power plant in Virginia, can help make that timetable real. Fusion has moved beyond the era when government science programs defined the pace of progress. Research backed by governments and universities has played a vital role in moving the technology forward, but Andrew argues that competition, venture capital and milestone-based development have changed the industry’s tempo. Crucially, the industry has not put all its eggs in one basket. Multiple companies are pursuing different technical paths, including both laser-based approaches and magnetic confinement systems, in a race to commerciality.  Bob offers the clearest lay explanation of what fusion power means in practice. Commonwealth Fusion Systems uses a tokamak, which is essentially a magnetic bottle that holds a star inside it. Fusion creates heat, which can be used to run a steam turbine. Unlike wind and solar, fusion does not depend on weather or geography. Unlike fossil fuels, it does not rely on continual fuel deliveries. The episode also explores why fusion developers believe the technology could avoid some of the political and regulatory burdens that have constrained nuclear fission power. Because fusion reactions are hard to start and easy to stop, the risks are fundamentally different from those of a conventional fission reactor. Bob and Andrew argue that this changes everything from plant safety to siting to licensing, and could make fusion much faster to deploy if the technical hurdles are cleared. They also discuss what it will take to build an industry, not just a few prototypes. Amy pushes on fuel cycles, lithium, superconducting tape and supply-chain readiness. Bob argues that these challenges are real but manageable, and Andrew points to the growing ecosystem of manufacturers now positioning themselves for a future fusion market. The wider point is that fusion is increasingly starting to look like a manufacturing and industrial-policy story, not just a laboratory science story. That leads to the biggest question of all: if fusion works, how much could it matter? Bob sketches outcomes ranging from a valuable but still niche source of clean baseload power to a genuinely transformative technology. Andrew goes even further, arguing that fusion could decouple energy from geography and geopolitics in a way no fuel-based system ever has. If the industry’s ambitions are realized, within the next ten years fusion could emerge as a commercial energy source with real consequences for grids, markets and global power.   This episode of Energy Gang is brought to you by ENGIE, the smarter energy supplier. ENGIE doesn't just provide the power to run your business — they supply the energy to move it forward, with reliable, flexible solutions built for what's next. Learn more at engieresources.com. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Los Angeles will host the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games, an event that poses formidable logistical challenges. To put it in terms that will be familiar to many Americans, it is the equivalent of seven Super Bowls happening every day, in one of the world’s biggest urban economies. That means huge demands on the city’s transport and energy systems. But it also creates a rare opportunity to use the games as a catalyst to accelerate investment that could leave the city cleaner, more resilient and better connected long after the closing ceremony. In this episode, host Ed Crooks talks to Matt Petersen, president and CEO of the Los Angeles Cleantech Incubator, or LACI. Matt explains how LACI has been using the run-up to the Games as a convening point for public and private sector action. The focus has been on transportation electrification, clean energy deployment and building infrastructure that can help Los Angeles cope with an influx of visitors while improving the quality of life for residents in the long term. Transport is key. Los Angeles is sometimes described as the car capital of the world, and transport will be the single biggest source of greenhouse gas emissions associated with the Games. EV sales and charging infrastructure are growing fast. Even so, LACI’s modelling suggests that Los Angeles still needs more people using buses and rail, as well as better first-mile and last-mile options, from e-bike share to EV car-share schemes, if it wants to hit its climate targets. The conversation also explores the less visible systems that support electrification and emissions reductions for transport. Matt points to the electrification of freight, the build-out of charging depots, battery-backed fast charging, and experiments with flexible grid connections that can bring new infrastructure online faster. Those developments are central to whether Los Angeles can make room for more EVs and rising power demand without waiting years for grid upgrades. Too often, host cities for the Olympics promise transformative benefits that never fully materialise. Matt’s case is that Los Angeles has a better shot than most, partly because it is not building a wave of new permanent venues, and partly because the most important investments are in systems the city needs anyway: electric buses, cleaner freight, charging networks, transit improvements, shade for riders in extreme heat, and cleaner air in communities that have long borne the brunt of pollution. Can a deadline like LA 2028 accelerate progress on some of the hardest problems in urban decarbonization? For Matt, the real prize is not a few weeks of smooth operations during the Games, but a lasting legacy of economic opportunity and lower emissions. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Whoever you ask, you are likely find broad agreement that the world needs more energy infrastructure. Whether you are worried about ensuring secure supplies, powering new data centres, or cutting greenhouse gas emissions, the answer is most often going to be investing in new assets: power plants, transmission lines, factories, pipelines, ports… the list goes on. But all too often, getting big projects built is painfully slow, expensive and unpredictable. It is particularly difficult in high-income countries, and perhaps in the US most of all. For this episode, host Ed Crooks and regular guest Dr. Melissa Lott are joined by Craig Albert, the President and COO of Bechtel, one of the world’s biggest engineering and construction companies. Together, they discuss the critical problems that get in the way of infrastructure projects, and what businesses and governments can do to get past them. First off, Craig acknowledges that the problems in the system all reflect good intentions. Communities, safety, the environment and local impacts all deserve scrutiny. The problem, especially in the US, is that the process used to take all those factors into account when approving large projects is slow, fragmented and uncertain. The result is that it pushes up costs, delays revenue, creates financing risk, and ultimately slows progress towards energy security and a lower-carbon energy system. The conversation digs into the role of trust and certainty in decision-making. Once a project has been assessed and approved, how do you stop it from being endlessly revisited? Craig argues that some aspects of the US system create particular difficulties. Other developed countries have shown that infrastructure projects can be brought in on time and on budget. Craig cites the Western Sydney International Airport project, which moved from site selection to full construction approval in just two and a half years. In the US, he says, the same process could easily take eight to ten. The discussion then turns to nuclear power, and the lessons from the two new AP1000 reactors built at the Vogtle plant in Georgia. Craig calls Southern Company and Georgia Power “national heroes” for taking on the first greenfield US nuclear project in decades, but he is candid about what went wrong. His biggest takeaway is the importance of deeply integrated EPC: engineering, procurement and construction working as one system from the start. He also stresses the need for earlier investment in workforce training, stronger supply-chain visibility and better sequencing to reduce costly reworks. From there, Ed and Melissa widen the lens to look at other energy sectors. Craig explains why the US LNG industry offers a more hopeful model of projects delivered without huge cost overruns and multi-year delays. In that industry the construction companies are building repeated, standardised projects, with integrated delivery, and a relentless focus on finding and fixing bottlenecks. Bechtel has delivered dozens of LNG trains, he says, all on schedule and within budget, while still improving speed from one project to the next. Similar lessons apply in solar, where scale, automation and better execution are helping push installation rates sharply higher. But policy and project design are only part of the story. Craig argues that workforce is the other great constraint. If every new power plant, grid upgrade, semiconductor fab and airport ultimately depends on skilled craft labour, then the US has to start treating those jobs with the respect they deserve. Restoring the status of skilled trades is not just a cultural issue. It is essential to the country’s ability to build, Craig says.  The closing message is both practical and cautionary: if the US wants more energy security, more electricity for AI and data centres, and faster progress on decarbonisation, it has to get much better at building. That means fixing permitting, reducing project uncertainty, investing earlier in supply chains, and treating skilled labour as a strategic asset, rather than an afterthought. This episode of Energy Gang is brought to you by ENGIE, the smarter energy supplier. ENGIE doesn't just provide the power to run your business — they supply the energy to move it forward, with reliable, flexible solutions built for what's next. Learn more at engieresources.com. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

US residential electricity prices have risen by more than 40 per cent since the start of 2021, which is much faster than general inflation. Utilities requested a total of $31 billion in increased rates last year, double the amount in 2024. And investor-owned utilities are planning to spend $1.4 trillion on capital projects over the next five years – enough on one calculation, to build almost 2,000 Hoover Dams at today’s prices. So why are American electricity bills going up, and what can be done to provide some relief for hard-pressed consumers? In this episode, host Ed Crooks and regular contributor Dr Melissa Lott are joined by Charles Hua, founder and executive director of PowerLines, a nonprofit launched in 2024. Charles's focus is on US states’ Public Utilities Commissions: the roughly 200 commissioners across the country who oversee around $200 billion in annual spending and ultimately determine what consumers pay. He calls them the “US Supreme Court justices of energy”. The discussion opens with questions of consumers’ perceptions, and how they align with reality. The data show that in the past few years, electricity bills have been rising, on average, explaining why the issue has been rising up the political agenda. Recent Ipsos polling commissioned by PoweLines found that four in five Americans feel powerless about energy costs. The proportion who believe their state officials are serving their interests as consumers fell from 38 per cent to 29 per cent in a single year. Charles calls this "a new politics of electricity." It is a domain that until recently sat outside mainstream political attention, but now reaches governors' offices and the White House. Charles and Melissa then unpack what is actually driving the increases. Melissa walks through the top five cost drivers identified in the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory's analysis: fuel and wholesale supply, distribution costs, generation capex, transmission costs, and cost recovery from extreme weather events. Charles points beyond the line items to a fundamental issue: the traditional utility business model, which structurally rewards capital spending.  The question about the impact of data centers is unavoidable. Charles breaks it down: until now, data centres have not been a meaningful driver of price increases across most of the country. But that does not mean they will not be in future. PJM's capacity auction, where prices have rocketed, is one early signal that the picture is starting to change. Charles offers three solutions. First, get more out of the existing grid, which is currently running at roughly 50 per cent utilisation, through technologies he describes as "ibuprofen for the grid." Second, modernise the utility business model, potentially drawing on the UK's totex approach, where utilities can earn a return on operational as well as capital spending. Third, improve grid planning, particularly how load is forecast and how integrated resource plans are built. Melissa zooms out to remind listeners what is actually at stake. Borrowing a line from Amory Lovins, she says: "I don't care about my electrons. I care about cold beer and hot showers." The question is not just about price, but about whether households can keep their homes safe and liveable year-round. You can learn more about PowerLines at PowerLines.org.   See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Methane is the second-most important greenhouse gas, after carbon dioxide. It has accounted for roughly 30% of human-induced global warming since the 19th century. But it is also a valued commodity, used to heat homes and cook food, provide raw materials for industry and keep the lights on. Every molecule leaked is energy wasted and money lost. The IEA estimates that about 200 billion cubic meters per year could be saved for productive uses by reducing leakage and flaring in the oil and gas industry. That is roughly one fifth of US supply, over a third of the global LNG trade, and nearly twice the volume exported through the Strait of Hormuz in 2025. Half of all abatement opportunities have a positive or zero net cost. The technology to cut emissions by 75% exists today. So why are methane emissions from oil and gas still so large? Host Ed Crooks is joined by TJ Conway, Principal at RMI's Climate Intelligence Program, to explore what it will take to tackle the problem. TJ walks through RMI's approach: first, better understanding where emissions are and how large they are, including the role of super emitters, sources above 100 kilograms per hour that can account for half of total leakage, and then driving change through market mechanisms, corporate engagement, finance, and capacity building.  He then talks about the key issue for future methane emissions reductions: the demand side. Creating a functioning market for differentiated, lower-emissions gas requires that buyers, including utilities, industrial companies and hyperscales using gas-powered data centres, can credibly account for those purchases in their emissions inventories. That architecture is still being built. Ed and TJ also dig into the EU Methane Emissions Regulation, now entering its implementation phase ahead of methane intensity thresholds taking effect by 2030. The technical challenges are considerable: tracing emissions from source to importer through complex supply chains like the US pipeline network, where a single LNG cargo may blend gas from low-intensity offshore fields and high-intensity Permian basin production. RMI has proposed a hybrid traceability approach to solve those challenges.  The episode also covers methane abatement finance. Financial institutions with climate goals are now often relucatant to invest in oil and gas operations, even for emissions reduction. RMI's Methane Finance Working Group, launched at COP28 alongside the Oil and Gas Decarbonisation Charter, has developed guidance for financing structures to overcome that obstacle. It aims to unlock financing to meet a need estimated at 100 to 200 billion dollars. TJ closes with an optimistic message: emissions remain stubbornly high, but the institutional infrastructure built over the past five years now provides the foundation for action. The goal remains a 75% reduction, and the tools exist to get there.   Rocky Mountain Institute was founded during the energy crises of the 1970s, with a simple idea: better energy systems can deliver both economic and environmental benefits. Nearly 50 years later, that mission has never been more relevant. As businesses and governments navigate rising electricity demand, supply-chain uncertainty, and the push to decarbonize, RMI helps turn complex energy challenges into practical solutions. From grid modernization and industrial decarbonization to clean transportation and building efficiency, RMI works across sectors to accelerate the energy transition in ways that improve resilience, affordability, and energy security. Learn more at rmi.org. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

There are two great forces reshaping the world of energy today. The AI boom and the wave of investment in new data centres have sent power producers scrambling for generation capacity to meet soaring electricity demand. At the same time, the severe disruption to shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz has put security of supply at the top of every importer's agenda. In this special episode, recorded at Wood Mackenzie's Gas, LNG and the Future of Energy Conference in London, host Ed Crooks speaks with three guests about what these twin pressures mean for gas. They discuss demand for gas for power, the sources of supply that could provide energy security in volatile times, and plans for tackling the increased greenhouse gas emissions that could result from increased consumption. First, Ed sits down with Neal Kalita, senior director of global energy management at NTT Global Data Centers, one of the world’s largest data center developers. Neal explains why "speed to power" is a priority, and why gas plays such a key role in providing the reliable 24/7 firm capacity hyperscaler clients require. Relying on gas as a key component of the power generation mix means managing a complex set of issues around supply security, demand management and long-term investment. Neal explains how NTT thinks about commodity risk, the trade-offs involved in power supply agreements, and why on-site gas generation may be not just a bridge solution but long-term infrastructure for the electricity system. He highlights the key drivers that are changing the data centre industry, including rising GPU power density, AI-driven volatility in load, and climate-related grid reliability concerns. He also discusses NTT's participation in a demand response programme run by Voltus, which helped stabilise the grid when Winter Storm Fern hit Virginia in January. Next, Ed hears from Keith Shoemaker, Chief Commercial Officer at Coastal Bend, which is developing a new LNG liquefaction project at Corpus Christi, Texas. Coastal Bend is aiming to have the first project in the US to integrate carbon capture and sequestration into its design. Combined with the procurement of upstream gas with low methane leakage and flaring, that should make for the lowest carbon-intensity LNG in the world, Keith says.  Crucially, the project can match competitor prices without charging a green premium. The US 45Q tax credit will cover the operational spending (Opex) for the transport and sequestration of the carbon, and costs will be kept down by using brownfield maritime infrastructure that is already in place. Regulation will still be essential in creating a market for lower-emissions LNG. Keith sets out an idea for making that work in the EU: linking the new Methane Emissions Regulation with the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism to create an "avoided carbon" currency that LNG importers could use to offset CBAM fees on other products such as cement, steel and fertiliser. That way, the methane regulation would change from a stick to a carrot for the LNG industry. Kristy Kramer, Head of LNG at Wood Mackenzie, closes the episode by assessing how the three trends of AI demand, energy security and decarbonisation fit together. She discusses the big question: has the conflict on the Middle East changed the world completely, forever. It may play out like the Covid pandemic. Huge changes were predicted, and although there were some permanent impacts, in other areas the world has gone back to the way it was before. Politics will change from week to week, or even from hour to hour, but geology and economics don’t, and over time the fundamentals will reassert themselves. Kristy and Ed reflect on what that means for the future of energy.   See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.