Every summer, we hear concerns about rolling blackouts. Every winter, we remember the failures of Winter Storm Uri. But how did we get here? What are the biggest risks, what has actually changed, and what still needs to happen?In this episode of the Energy Capital Podcast, I sat down with Mose Buchele, longtime energy and environment reporter at KUT and the host of The Disconnect, a podcast that has taken a deep dive into the history and politics behind the Texas grid.Mose’s reporting has helped shape how Texans understand energy, and in this conversation, we pull from his years of investigative work to connect past decisions to today’s challenges.One of the biggest takeaways from The Disconnect is that Texas’ grid problems didn’t start with Winter Storm Uri. In Season One, Mose and colleagues explored how a combination of regulatory neglect, an isolated grid, and a failure to coordinate gas and electricity markets set the stage for the catastrophe. In Season Two, a fundamental question was asked: Who really controls Texas energy? The deregulated system we have today didn’t happen by accident, it was built by political and economic decisions that benefited certain industries and players. In our conversation, Mose and I discuss who makes money when the grid fails and why Texas has been slow to adopt reforms that would prevent another crisis.But to really understand Texas energy, you have to go even further back. In Season Three, Mose has been unpacking the deep history of natural gas in Texas, starting with the wild stories of oil discoveries and the creation of the Railroad Commission—the agency that still oversees Texas’ oil and gas system today. The decisions that shaped oil and gas policy 100 years ago still influence energy outcomes today. Texas’ decision to keep gas separate from electricity regulation may have made sense in the 1970s, but today, it leaves the grid vulnerable during extreme weather.We also talked about ERCOT’s unique position as an independent grid, separate from the Eastern and Western Interconnections. This independence was originally designed to avoid federal oversight, but in today’s world of skyrocketing demand, extreme weather, and a shifting energy mix, is that strategy still serving Texas well? Should Texas interconnect with the national grid, or are there benefits to maintaining independence?The Texas Energy and Power Newsletter is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.So where does that leave us today? Mose and I break down what needs to happen next to ensure reliability as Texas faces skyrocketing demand from AI data centers, industrial growth, extreme heat, and population increases. The grid is changing, but is it changing fast enough?Mose’s deep reporting and historical perspective make this a particularly insightful episode. If you want to truly understand how we got here and what happens next, this is an episode you won’t want to miss.As always, please like, share, and leave a five-star review wherever you listen to podcasts. Your support helps bring these critical energy conversations to more people.Timestamps* 00:00 – Introduction* 02:30 – The Disconnect Podcast: the origin and why Texas' energy history* 04:30 – Season 3 focus and “Who is Dad Joiner?” aka The Max Bialystock of Oil* 09:00 – The genesis of the Railroad Commission's and its role in oil regulation* 12:04 – How OPEC learned from the Railroad Commission * 17:00 – Why Texas was the last state to create a public utility commission, the Energy Crisis, and why gas utilities weren’t included in PUC regulation* 28:00 – Historical causes of Winter Storm Uri, and why it was so severe* 32:00 – The difference between “deregulation” to increase competition and lack of regulation of basic public safety* 39:00 – The Midnight Connection and how Texas’ grid was almost connected to the rest of the country* 43:30 – Understanding Black Start: what happens if the entire grid fails* 47:30 – Post-winter storm improvements and ongoing need for improvement* 50:31 – The Disconnect between gas and electric systems, the idea for a “gas desk” * 54:30 - Who profited from Uri? Why is there little to no regulation of intrastate gas monopolies?ResourcesMose Buchele and the The Disconnect Podcast: * Mose Buchele on X and the KUT Website* The Disconnect: Power, Politics and the Texas Blackout (Apple Podcast, Spotify)* Season One: Explores Winter Storm Uri, deregulation, and the grid’s vulnerabilities.* Season Two: Investigates who profits from Texas’ energy system and how market forces shape ERCOT.* Bonus Episode in 2022 with yours truly: The Megawatt You Don’t Use* Season Three: Traces the history of natural gas regulation in Texas and its impact on today’s grid challenges.Winter Storm Uri & Market Failures* The Great Texas Blackout Was Caused by a Failure to Ensure Supplies of Natural Gas, Charles Blanchard, Texas Monthly* Why Gas Failed During Uri – An in-depth Texas Monthly feature explaining how gas supply failures triggered power outages.* A look at the Texas grid three years after Winter Storm Uri: Three Years Gone, Texas Energy & Power Newsletter* The Texas Grid Came Close to an Even Bigger Disaster During February Freeze, Rebecca Smith, WSJNatural Gas, The Railroad Commission, and OPEC* “Is This Texas Oil Icon a Price-Fixing Saudi Collaborator or a Political Scapegoat?” Scott Sheffield role in Price Fixing in Texas* Texas Railroad Commission (RRC) – The regulatory agency responsible for oil and gas, originally created to oversee railroads but later shaped energy markets.* The Extraction State: A History of Natural Gas in America by Charles Blanchard * For more, listen to Season 3 of The Disconnect!ERCOT’s Market Structure & Texas Grid Independence* The Midnight Connection Episode – The Disconnect podcast episode detailing Texas’ attempt to interconnect with the national grid and why it failed.* Disconnect Bonus Episode: The Black Start* The Energy Capital Podcast, Episode 1 with Former PUC Commissioner Will McAdamsMore on Texas History* Profile of Oscar Wyatt and Lovaca Gas during the energy crisis in Texas Monthly in May 1975 by Paul Burka: Power Politics: How one company’s wheeling and dealing brought the energy crisis into your life TranscriptMose Buchele (00:00.0)This system of control that began here in Austin and in Texas was adopted by other countries and eventually taken over by OPEC, which still uses the blueprint for it today in the way that those member nations will decide on allowables and supply in order to fix the global energy prices. Doug Lewin (00:22.402)Why does Texas have its own power grid? How did a Texas wildcatter, who wasn't even trying to find oil, spark a global energy revolution? How did a Texas agency originally set up to regulate railroads create the blueprint for OPEC's oil supply strategy that caused the 1970s energy crisis? If you want to understand why the Texas energy system works the way it does, you have to go deep into the history. Over the last four years, KUT senior reporter Moe's, Bouchelle and colleagues at KUT have created an awesome series that does exactly that. It's called The Disconnect, Power, Politics and the Texas Blackout. It unpacks the forces that have shaped and continue to shape Texas grid, gas markets and energy policy. Moe's created an award winning series telling the hidden stories behind Texas energy from the railroad commissions cartel like power over oil markets in the 1930s to the Midnight Connection, the secret power line that could have changed Texas grid history by connecting us to the rest of the country. The first season was a deep dive into winter storm Uri and the history of deregulation in the state, something we talked about in this podcast. The second season tracked the changes that had been made and those that hadn't. They had me on for a bonus episode called the Megawatt You Save focused on energy efficiency. This current season, which just launched in February 2025, focuses on one of the least regulated industries in America, natural gas within the state borders of Texas. And what that means for grid reliability in the Lone Star State. It's fantastic. I've loved all the seasons of The Disconnect, but honestly, this one might be the best. I love this conversation with Moe's. It's about energy, yes, but it's also about power, politics, money, and the decisions made decades ago that still shape our lives today. Stick around because by the end of this episode, you will look at Texas energy or Texas history the same way again. Make sure you like, share, and subscribe to the Energy Capital Podcast and to The Disconnect. It's one of my favorite podcasts on all topics, not just energy, and I'm confident you'll like it too. Thanks for listening. Hope you enjoyed this episode of the Energy Capital Podcast. Mose Buchele welcome to the Energy Capital Podcast. Hey man, this is great. Thanks for doing this. Obviously I'm a big fan of the disconnect. Let's just start, just share with the audience, what is the disconnect and how it got started. Mose Buchele (02:31.63)Thanks so much, Doug. All right, so this is a podcast project that started actually really kind of during the big blackout in 2021. We're talking here at KUT studios. We were all here trying to figure out what was going on. Bunch of reporters trying to understand the power grid, all the issues at play. And even as it was happening, it kind of became clear that this is something that was going to take more than just some kind of breaking news updates, right? You had to explain all these complicated things about the way electric infrastructure works, about the way Mose Buchele (03:11.086)the energy markets work about a million different things and there's this deep history to it. And so we think, well, that sounds like the kind of thing that could be tackled in a podcast. We do audio storytelling really well and we do explanatory journalism really well, which is I think a big part of this is just explaining to people how these things work. And that was kind of the impetus. yeah, we're now on our third season. It started in 2021 and we've been releasing them as we've kind of seen the need and had the capacity. Doug Lewin (03:42.498)Yeah, it's one of the things I love about podcasts and it's, think why they're like so well suited actually to our time is because we're so used to now like getting news in tiny little snippets, right? 140 or 280 characters and little 60 second videos. But usually you wanna, especially with a story like this, like you wanna know more and you guys have really, really done it well. This mix of human storytelling, like really understanding the human side of things. Doug Lewin (04:10.062)And explaining the regulatory and the history, is so complicated and so rich. You guys are doing a great job. Mose Buchele (04:16.942)Thanks, I appreciate that. it is, it's a real undertaking, but even like the, you know, it's a political story, it's a science story, it's a financial story. And obviously the reason we all care about it early is because it's a human story. And so yeah, all of that comes into play and it's been hard to tackle, but it's been also really, you know, incredibly interesting and rewarding. Yeah. Doug Lewin (04:39.094)Awesome. So we're gonna talk about all the seasons, but I wanna start with season three. When we release this episode, you'll sort of be like, sort of part of the way through of releasing the episodes in season three. And you're really now diving into natural gas, which talk about a complicated history with all sorts of characters. I think if it's all right, I actually want you to start with. Doug Lewin (05:03.64)Just to give folks a flavor of what they'll get if they do listen to these episodes. And again, I highly encourage folks to listen to them. They're so great. Who is dad joining? Mose Buchele (05:13.28)Okay, this is where, as a disclaimer, we start this with a lot of history. And it's history I love, and it is, I think, just endlessly engaging and fascinating. if you're tuning into here in the first episode, like what is happening right now in terms of new developments, you're going to have to wait for a while. Doug Lewin (05:34.862)We'll get into this as we go, but if, you know, for folks that are wondering about this also, you can go, if you want to start with season one, you kind of go back to how Winter Storm Urie happened. we're going to get there. I want to work backwards because this one is current and it is something that Mo's even as, and I think it's safe for me to call myself an energy nerd. I know a lot of this history. There are so many rich details in your podcast that I didn't know. Doug Lewin (06:03.534)But you don't, and this is what I hope comes through to the audience and people will tell friends and family, it's like, it doesn't feel like you're getting a history lesson. It's entertaining, it's engaging. Oh my gosh. Tell us about that, Mose Buchele (06:14.734)So Dad Joyner was the father of the East Texas oil field, which was up at that point, the biggest oil field ever discovered in the United States. And he was by most accounts, kind of a con man. guy, there were a lot of these kinds of operators that were moving around the oil patch at this time, who were finding ways to raise money for projects and then spend that money and not always find oil in the process. Doug Lewin (06:45.614)You know who he reminded me of? I had recently been visiting my my dad. And one of the things I do when I visit my dad is we watch silly movies and we were watching the producers. I knew that's right. Max Bialystok, like dad joiner is an oil patch version of Max Bialystok. Mose Buchele (07:01.014)The entire idea is that you raise money on a project and you get to keep that money as long as it fails. So there you go. That's the, that is the producers in a nutshell, right? And, and so his, you know, his whole thing was that he would, in partnership with a guy named Doc Lloyd, who has one of my, one of the people I spoke to said, practice medicine without, without the formality of a medical license, they would create geological surveys that would suggest that there might be oil to be found in one place or another. And on the basis of these surveys, which really didn't appear to have much, you know, actual geology, but underneath them, they would raise money to be paid back once the oil was discovered. Now, if the oil is never discovered, then you get to keep the money. And this is the way it worked for them for years and years. And it's a, it's a fascinating story because of the personalities involved and the people involved, also because it suggests that this oil field, which revolutionized the world of energy, and had ramifications that we still feel to this day, it was found because someone was intentionally not looking for oil. And so it took somebody not looking to actually uncover this vast reservoir of energy in East Texas. And then from there, you could argue the story even gets weirder. Doug Lewin (08:19.822)Yeah so folks can go and should go and listen to the, to the episode and get more of this. like basically you, you end up in a situation where a woman who is like, I guess an investor or her land, she's got land there. She starts to become suspicious. She thinks, no, there really is oil. They do end up discovering oil. is very bad for dad joiner. And it ends up being, like you said, historically significant, globally significant oil field. And it happens in 1930. So we're heading into a decade, obviously, where the second world war is gonna start. And like this oil field really plays a major role going forward. But you get into the railroad commission and how this is, think, a history folks don't understand and is highly, highly relevant to today because what you had was everybody drilling all over the place to the point where prices dropped to what, like a, it was like 10 cents a barrel or something like that at some point. And so you start to get into what is called prorationing, right? So the railroad commission, can you talk a little bit about how that actually made the railroad commission popular. You would think by telling people don't drill, you're gonna get a lot of companies mad at you, but it actually had kind of the opposite effect, right? Mose Buchele (09:47.81)Absolutely. And again, this is history that is helpful in understanding the role of the commission today. For example, what we had was an agency called the Railroad Commission that was founded to regulate railroads, as the name would suggest. Doug Lewin (10:03.662)Governor Hogg is that what she right? Yeah, yeah. Mose Buchele (10:06.092)Yeah. And it was a huge deal back then. There was a big populist movement, particularly farmers and ranchers were really, really upset with the monopoly power that railroads exercised over their commodities. And so they were going to their elected leaders and saying, you got to crack down on these guys. Railroad commission is born. But through a series of kind of historical circumstances, the Railroad Commission ended up gaining more authority over pipelines than railroads, over oil and gas pipelines. And so suddenly you had this agency called the Railroad Commission, which is still called today, beginning to exercise authority over oil and gas. If you fast forward to the 1930s, to the Depression era, when the East Texas field was uncovered, you have then this agency with this hot potato thrown in its lap. People are drilling for oil like crazy and it's cratering the price of oil. There's just an oversupply of oil on the market. This is very bad for, especially for the large integrated kind of big oil companies. A lot of them from the Northeast that think standard oil, right? That depend on a stable market and a kind of more consistent expectation of return because they're making huge upfront investments on what they're doing. And so then these, this part, this faction, Mose Buchele (11:33.006)of the oil industry goes to Austin and says, well, we've got to do something about this. This is how the, what you pro rationing or pro rationing people, I've heard it called different things is, is born. It is the concept that the government will, will regulate the supply set allowables for how much oil or gas can be produced in order to stabilize the market. And that will, that will allow for a, kind of oil or whatever commodities not get too too low, maybe not get too high too if that's gonna have bad effects on the market. Doug Lewin (12:10.862)It's effectively a cartel, right? It's exactly what it is. Because basically just like you would think of a drug cartel, not to say that the railroad commission was a drug cartel, but it's the same principle, right? If you control the supply, then you can actually keep those prices higher and presumably then all the suppliers are doing better. And so they actually do that successfully, right? Mose Buchele (12:33.999)It wasn't an easy sell, especially when you're dealing with more independent and especially during the depression era, you're dealing with Doug Lewin (12:39.566)Because demand is so low. So you can only do so much with supply. There's not demand because of the depression. Mose Buchele (12:43.842)You had independent and again, still to this day, these are schisms that you see within the industry. have independent operators, you have a small time landowners, have people who were farmers who are losing their mortgage because of the depression. Suddenly they can dig an oil well in their backyard and they're happy making a few cents. They'll take anything. They, in some cases, violently resisted this kind of regulation. But what was eventually arrived at? Mose Buchele (13:12.718)it appears is that most sectors of the industry came to realize there was a benefit to that type of essentially what was price fixing, you know, on the part of the state government, on the part of the commission. And this was done in cooperation with different factions of industry. And that is how this, what you correctly described as a cartel system of regulating supply was born. And it was born right here in Texas. Doug Lewin (13:40.214)Yep. And then OPEC learns from the railroad commission, like literally studies what the railroad commission has done and then uses that to sort of, you know, wield oil as a weapon in the 1970s, which causes the energy. Mose Buchele (13:56.172)We're getting again, and now we're getting into the second episode. And again, like I said, this lays the foundation for a lot of interesting kind of historical things that come up later. indeed, this system of control that began here in Austin and in Texas was adopted by other countries and eventually taken over by OPEC, which still uses the blueprint for it today in the way that those member nations Mose Buchele (14:22.444)Will decide on allowables and supply in order to fix the global energy prices. Doug Lewin (14:27.15)We're recording March 5th. Just this week, OPEC announced that they were going to release more barrels into the market. They have tried over the last few years through OPEC plus, which includes Russia and some others that weren't traditionally part of OPEC to pull back the supply to cause the price to go higher. Prices have sort of stubbornly been right around 70 and they have kind of decided, forget it, we're going to release a couple more million barrels. So all of this is to say, right, this history, there's a through line right to today. And if you want to understand what's going on in the energy world and you don't want to read great long textbooks, a podcast is a great way to learn about it. So, and actually just one other tidbit on this, Moe's, and I don't know if you are going to cover this later, but there's also a very recent example, right, of some of the companies coming to the railroad commission during COVID. You could quote unquote buy a barrel of oil for a negative price for a couple of weeks there, maybe not a couple of weeks, maybe one week, whatever it was during COVID. And some of the companies came to the railroad commission and said, we should do pro rationing again. This is only a couple of years ago. So like now they voted against that. The railroad commission did not do it. But again, like all of these issues still kind of circle around today. I think it shocked a lot of people to even learn that the commission still had that power. that they ever did. mean, if you're not paying attention, if it's not something that you study, like there was a really memorable public hearing, and you had, you people coming in and telling commissioners, need to do this. We need to this to, you know, to save the business basically. And then others opposing and rarely are those schisms and those tensions within industry on public display but in moments of crisis they get there. Doug Lewin (16:19.116)That's exactly right. And I will put in the show notes a link to Russell Gold with Texas Monthly wrote an article about Scott Sheffield that he was under investigation. I can't remember if there was actually an indictment or just an investigation from DOJ on that. Like sort of what was happening during that period and whether or not he was actually talking to allegedly leaders in other countries and other oil companies around the world trying to get the price of oil up and whether or not that was some kind of collusion or Mose Buchele (16:49.518)Price fixing or something like that. Doug Lewin (16:51.174)Yeah, yeah, totally. That is still like literally playing out in real time right now. So in the third episode, which just came out again, as we're recording just a few days ago, you do get into, and this, I really, I'm sorry to be like so gushing to my audience, but I just really do love this series. I have for a long time, like wondered, we, Texas was one of the very last states to have It was the last. The last to have a public utility commission. Wasn't, wasn't established till 1975. Doug Lewin (17:18.766)And I've often kind of wondered about that. And I actually taught a class at the LBJ school last semester. So I was doing some research. I found some journal articles that kind of got into it, but journal articles are pretty dry. You found the man who was still alive and not even particularly old. He was very, very young when he was elected in the 1970s. Tell us about Lyndon Olson and the beginnings of the Public Utility Commission. Mose Buchele (17:45.166)mean, an incredible storyteller too. It was just one of these things where I call this guy up and he's like, yeah, sure, I'll talk about it. So Lyndon is, I mean, he's had a very long career, but as you said, he's from Waco and he was elected a democratic state rep from Waco in the early seventies, right as the energy crisis kind of hits, especially as we understand it in popular consciousness. There were obviously kind of shortages and building up to the energy crisis before then, but- Doug Lewin (18:14.656)And I think most people listening will probably know this. And again, you describe it well in the podcast, but for those that don't know, right? mean, this was, it's not hyperbole to call it a crisis. Like you couldn't fill up your car. had long lines, half a mile long in some cases. People were freezing in their homes in the wintertime because there wasn't enough gas. It was a mess. Mose Buchele (18:32.014)Absolutely. yeah, and again, I think that some of that's lost. you know, if you're younger, you weren't alive for that time, you don't realize it, but it was such a huge thing. anyway, yeah, young man, not even in his thirties, elected from Waco to be a state rep. And he kind of enters into this debate over, how are we going to better regulate utilities? And this wasn't just energy utilities. wasn't just electric utilities. It wasn't just gas utilities. There was, but everyone is worried about the high cost of everything at that time. Obviously in the energy crisis, the cost of electricity and the cost of gas went way, way, way up. And that was really pinching people. There was also a massive scandal that I wasn't that aware of around telephone utilities, telecoms. Southwestern Bell was in a lot of trouble for its rates and some of its corporate behavior. All of this rolls together to collide with the fact that Texas is looking around and saying, every other state has a public utility commission and we don't have one. Basically, almost all these things were really mostly decided at the local level. And so in 1975, there is a growing kind of appetite in a chorus, consumer advocates, all sorts of different kind of factions that maybe it's time to have a public utility commission. This man, Lyndon Olson, comes in and as he describes it to me, he's actually kind of more in favor of maintaining local control over a lot of these questions. He was interested in strengthening the power of local oversight as he recounts it to me in the bill that he first introduced. One of the big questions about that was that small towns especially, but really almost any city didn't feel equipped to go up against some of these massive monopoly utilities when they're gonna do rate negotiations, right? And so. Doug Lewin (20:19.352)So they really didn't have watchdogs, right? It was like cities trying, it was a complete mismatch. Mose Buchele (20:25.326)So Olson gets in there and drops a bill that, as he said, would initially strengthen local control over some of these issues. As he recounted it to me, it was immediately substituted by the Public Utility Commission Bill, the Public Utilities Regulation Act that establishes the Public Utility Commission. And then from there, the story gets even stranger when you start to look at how they decided which utilities were going to then fall under the auspices of what became the Public Utility Commission. Because when the bill was first written, gas utilities were a part of that. And he tells the story of how it was explained to him in no uncertain terms that all of that regulation and oversight was to remain at the Railroad Commission. From the very inception of the PUC then, you see this tension. How are we going to have some say over what should be fair electric rates while we have no real regulatory control over the sector of energy that provides the fuel to create that electricity. And here I'm speaking mostly to natural gas. you know, so there's a quote that I don't, I don't even know if I included it in the podcast, but maybe I'll try to slip it in somewhere. After the public utility commission is established, regulation of natural gas is kept at the railroad commission, which has given utility cost of service kind of regulation authority over gas utilities. There is a guy who was a city attorney for the city of Austin and became a consultant later on for the city. And he was asked, is this going to help us with our electric rates? Because gas rates and electric rates in Austin had been going crazy because of another whole other scandal that we got into in the podcast in regards to a company called Coastal States or Lovaca Gathering that had different names. Doug Lewin (22:15.31)A notorious case. Mose Buchele (22:18.668)So this guy, Don Butler was his name. He's asked quite understandably, is the Public Utility Commission gonna help us lower our electric costs now that it exists? And he said, it's really not because it never got authority over natural gas. And he said, what the legislature did is that he allowed us to regulate the tail, but not the dog. Wow. Yeah, yeah, I don't have it on tape, but it's still, it's a killer quote. Doug Lewin (22:40.263)Wow. Which really kind of sums it You've got to get that correct. You need to go back and get him to record that and put it in there. Look, I think hopefully it isn't lost on anybody listening right now, right? The connection back to seasons one and two where you're dealing with Winter Storm Uri because part of the story of Winter Storm Uri is a lack of coordination between gas and electric. If people want to, you know, ask... Doug Lewin (23:08.878)Why did that happen? Why did 240 something people die? Why did a hundred billion dollars in damage happen because of freezing pipes? And why was I without power for three or four days? There's a long list of reasons, but on anybody's short list is there was terrible coordination, if any coordination at all, between the gas sector and the electric sector and the seeds of that were planted in 1975 when the PUC was established and not given any authority over gas. Mose Buchele (23:37.902)I remember actually way back in 2021, it was probably one of our earlier interviews on this subject. I called you for a story I was working on and you were one of the first people I spoke to about this. And this became, like you said, a huge and continues to be a huge question in Texas. Like how do we coordinate those two parts of energy, gas and electric? And it's something that a lot of the efforts, I guess I could just say that have been proposed, a lot of the proposals have not succeeded so far. So it's still an open debate, you know, in terms of how you do. Doug Lewin (24:11.086)So let's, is there anything more you want to say about season three? You want to give folks like kind of where it's going, what to look for, anything I should ask you about season three before I kind of go back to Uri and we talk about season one and two. Mose Buchele (24:21.09)You know, I just think, like I said, season three has been a really cool, a little bit of a different take on the podcast because we focus on history throughout every season. But this one, I really like telling this integrated story that is now, you know, if you start tuning in, know, it's difficult to do timing on podcasts, but we'll slowly bring you up to today. And it's been a fascinating challenge, like seeing how that works but everything does kind of connect. mean it all just comes together. You know if history doesn't repeat it at least it rhymes. Doug Lewin (24:55.854)Exactly correct. And I'll just say one more thing about that. I meant to say this earlier and forgot. there's, cause again, the connections between the past and the present are, they're obvious, but I think sometimes it's good to say them out loud. So we are right now, again, so we're recording on March 5th. By the time this comes out, who knows what will happen with tariffs. But one thing that folks associated advisors to the Trump administration, people within the administration are saying is, we're gonna, that may cause prices to go up, but we're gonna counteract that because this drill baby drill thing, we're gonna bring oil down to like 50 bucks. And so then your prices are gonna go down. So it'll all be okay. And I think what, you can go back to history and see what happens when you drill baby drill and prices crater. And a lot of people lose their shirts and then people stop drilling, right? Like the that isn't the way it works. You have market forces. You can't just as a government say, we're going to go drill because once you do that, now you're causing this other counter force where you're going to get less drilling. Yep. And we've already got this countervailing force of OPEC putting more barrels on. So, yep. Anyway, it really is great to like get into that history and see those parallels because there's just so many of them to, to today. Yeah. I really appreciate what you're doing with that. I, again, it is hard even as somebody who just loves this stuff and I'm pretty voracious reader on this stuff. I'll put a link. There's some good like books on the history of natural gas and stuff, like those, they're hard reads. Like, you know, like to get that in a 30 or 40 minute podcast and feel like, okay, I have a deeper understanding of this, this history. It's a real like public service. It's really. Mose Buchele (26:40.224)Well, thank you. Yeah. And I think I've read more for this, this particular season than I have for any others. I've checked out some great books, but also some of them, yeah, cause it can get pretty wonky. Doug Lewin (26:50.574)Shout out to Charles Blanchard. I will put a link to his books on natural gas that are actually like, I think is, I forget the title, I'll put it in there, but it's like. Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's a great read. He wrote a great piece for Texas Monthly two or three weeks after Uri that was something along the lines of like. Mose Buchele (26:59.886)Extraction state or extraction. You recommended that to me actually. Doug Lewin (27:14.572)Uri was a problem of natural gas supply. And his book, Extraction State, is a great one and very readable. But, you know, let's be honest, that, that many people, sorry, Charles, are gonna read your, like, 300 400 page book on the history of natural gas in America. I did. I loved it. And even though I read that book and have read many others, there are details you have in there that I have never heard before. So, okay, enough on that. So let's go back to season one. You, you're putting episodes out only months after Winter Storm Uri ended. I actually just kind of want to start with, we've already talked about one of the reasons why Uri happened was this connection between gas and electric or lack of communication, lack of coordination between gas and electric. If you're kind of a doctor diagnosing the problems, right? You're deep into this. You've talked to so many people about this, put together episodes on it. Why did Winter Storm Uri happen? come on, Yeah, yeah. So one is electric gas, but there's a list, right? Mose Buchele (28:11.046)Yeah, yeah. It's real easy question. my goodness. Well, so, you know, yeah, obviously the question of why, not just why did the blackout happen, but why it was so severe and so bad. You can answer it a million different ways. And in fact, there's, you know, there are still a lot of differences of opinion about it, right? I mean, and we can get into what some people are still litigating today later on in our conversation, but Doug Lewin (28:12.608)It's an easy question. Mose Buchele (28:40.546)What we do in the first season is that in the aftermath of the blackout, everybody was talking about deregulation. Texas existed as did the rest of the country under a system of with regulated regional monopoly utilities ever since basically the beginning of or the maturation of electricity as a thing that everybody. Doug Lewin (28:59.244)But as you were talking about before, right, and because we didn't have public utility commission, very lightly regulated monopoly. if regulated at all, kind of self-regulated, which means not really regulated at all. Mose Buchele (29:11.586)Yeah. So then there's this period where you have utilities that are regulated by, you know, with stricter price controls by the government. And there's a very close relationship between regulators and these monopoly utilities. They're allowed the, I don't, again, I feel like I'm kind of rehashing just utility 101 or something, but we had a large fleet of different kinds of power plants in Texas, many of them natural gas, because we had an abundance of gas here. Although also that became a whole thing after the energy crisis, some coal and other ways to generate electricity too. Deregulation hits, that breaks down the monopolies and these power generators are now forced to compete, to offer the lowest price. And critics of deregulation, of which you heard many, especially after this catastrophic power failure, pointed out that the capacity, the excess capacity that Texas had enjoyed through the 1990s under regulation had all but been kind of frittered away by the time we got to 2021. And so then when energy demand went through the roof and power plants, which at that time had been under invested in and were many of them reaching their kind of end of their natural lifespan, started breaking down, you had a crash in energy supply on one hand, right as you had a skyrocketing of energy demand on the other, all thanks to this extreme and cold weather. Mose Buchele (30:39.372)And what that leads to is an imbalance on the grid and forces the state grid operator to rebalance supply and demand by cutting the demand. They can't encourage more supply because there's no real extra supply out there. They had used every mechanism they possibly could to bring some including spiking the price to try to potentially get more on there. So that's one way of looking at this. that was one of the questions we tried to explore in the first season. And I think that we found it was a little more complicated than that, but I think that that is maybe a good place to start with your question. Doug Lewin (31:19.424)Yeah, yeah, yeah. So this is something I've obviously talked to a lot of people about. The very first episode of the Energy Capital podcast I did was with Will McAdams. Will was of course the first commissioner appointed after winter storm Uri. And one of the things, cause he's pretty strong defender of what I think he wouldn't, and frankly I would also call not the deregulated market, cause there's still a lot of regulation, right? There's an independent market monitor. There's all sorts of controls and penalties that many of which have been assessed over the last 20, 25 years for folks that withhold power from the market. Like there is regulation of that market, but it's a restructured market that then is competitive, right? We do have competition on both generation and retail. And he's a pretty big defender of that. And one of the things he said in that podcast, which has been said a lot since, since Winter Storm Uri said during the hearings after Uri heading into February of 2021, the various reports our cop puts out of how much capacity versus demand, we had a 40 % cushion. So like, even if you had had like a fully regulated system, you almost certainly would not have ordered your fully regulated utility to purchase more power because you have 40 % reserve margin. What do you need, a 50, 60 % reserve margin? Like 40 is a lot of slack in the system. And in fact, A year and a half later, right, December, 2022, almost two years later, winter storm Elliott, we did see blackouts in areas of the country that have fully regulated utilities. Tennessee Valley authority has a huge reserve margin. They had blackouts. They, by the way, also only have two to 3%, less than 3 % of their mix is renewables, 97 % thermal, huge capacity reserve margins, and they still had rolling outages. So the conclusion that McAdams reaches and we talked about a lot during that particular podcast. And I think I reached the same kind of conclusion is it wasn't actually like the restructured market, but a lack of regulation was a big part of it. Because we weren't winterizing power plants. We weren't winterizing the gas fields. We weren't requiring homes and buildings to reach a standard where that demand would not spike. So there's still a problem of quote unquote deregulation. But it's not necessarily the way the wholesale market is set up. you, how does, how does that? Mose Buchele (33:42.248)Yeah, no, I think there's a lot to that. think that the, first of all, to the question of like calling something, saying deregulation, it is just misleading to say that it's, you know, what you're really talking about is an arrangement between regulator, a very specific arrangement between regulators and monopolies. And again, this doesn't just happen in electricity. I mean, when deregulation became a thing in the late seventies, it went to numerous different industries. Doug Lewin (34:06.888)Airlines is one of the, right? Because like you literally could only fly from one city to another if you had the government, you know, license to do so. And if you want, if you saw somebody who was flying the New York to Chicago route and you're like, I could serve that for half as much, you could not. And it was Jimmy Carter and Alfred Kahn. Like it was really actually like liberals that really got, in concert with conservatives, there was actually sort of like, ideological agreement across the spectrum that like charging 500 bucks for a route that somebody else could serve for 200 isn't a good thing. Mose Buchele (34:42.252)One of the main continued critiques, even given what you've just articulated, is that people are nervous about a system which rewards scarcity. And when you create a deregulated, quote unquote, sorry, whatever you wanna call it, restructured market, you have a system where the price of what you're selling becomes more valuable as its scarcity. Rises which is scarcely rising you understand what I'm saying? I understand volatility when prices go up and and so to give one example. Talk to people who used to work for big utilities. In the 80s and 90s, it was very common for more power plants to have massive tanks for backup fuel, for fuel oil, right? That they could switch to to burn if their natural gas supply shut down. And in fact, they would sometimes coordinate with their gas supplies. I was talking to a guy just a few weeks ago who said that they would get calls and say, the pressure is going to drop in these pipes as a big storm or something. Something's happened. Switch to the fuel oil. And then they can keep generating power. The market incentive to have that type of backup did begin to evaporate after the restructuring. And I think that is a kind of thing, like a very specific example you can point to and say, that maybe was a problem because that could have come in handy, again, maybe in 2021. But your point is well taken. There are a hundred different things that came in to create this crisis. And we are seeing not crises of the same magnitude, but similar challenges with energy systems and grids and ISOs and whatever all around the country. And so it is not just one thing. I mean, we could talk about Texas's relative isolation in terms of its own grid is another thing people point to all the time. We've already kind of mentioned the whole question of natural gas and how it feeds into the system. I mean, if you want to talk about regulation versus deregulation, know, ERCOT looks like a very tightly run ship when you start looking at what rules may or may not exist when it comes to how natural gas is traded and moved around the state. That's one reason why we were interested in doing this new season. So, yeah, is just a question of degree in a lot of ways. Doug Lewin (37:04.398)No, I think that's right. And I actually think you hit the nail right on the head that I think what does get people very nervous about a competitive market is the question of scarcity and volatility and high prices. And it is hard for folks to kind of get used to that. And you see this happen all the time. There are days during the year we've seen them, we didn't see as much in 2024, though quite a few in 2023 where prices got really high. I was often on Twitter saying that is not necessarily a bad thing. If we get into an energy emergency, that's bad. But like high prices actually are a signal to investors that you want to come into the market. But that's a hard thing. I don't discount that. That is hard. It's a little scary, right? But people have to like, know, markets do require some uncertainty, some dynamism and some high prices. That's how markets work. Mose Buchele (38:00.352)And there's also just, mean, not to kind of take a different turn with this, but within the context of Texas, know, people love and hate the, and I'll use your term restructuring for various reasons, but one thing that it did do, and we get into this in the first season, it was the way that we kind of opened up to allow for so many more renewables and so many more other kinds of ways of generating electricity in this state. And so it's not just you find people defending or criticizing that historical decision for all sorts of reasons, but there are a lot of people who just in terms of the energy mix really celebrate what happened under deregulation for just that reason. Doug Lewin (38:41.824)Yeah, yeah, yeah. And it was one of the reasons why it passed with such wide margins, throughout the House and Senate in a very bipartisan way, partly because there was an energy efficiency resource standard, there was a renewable portfolio standard in there. You have great episodes throughout these first couple seasons on, you mentioned Urquhart's isolation, you had one on the Midnight Connection, I wanna ask you about that. You had a great episode on Black Start, which I feel like still is not understood by folks enough. You obviously had episodes rather that got deep into deregulation, Senate Bill 7. You talked a lot with Senator Sibley. Given it's an hour long podcast, I'm not gonna ask you about each and every one of those, but is there one in particular sort of like asking you which of your kids you love the most? Is there an episode though you wanna kind of highlight for the audience? It's like, I gotta imagine the Midnight Connection one is one. Again, that was like a history that as much of a nerd as I am, I did not really appreciate how that all came about. Mose Buchele (39:39.522)I love that episode and I love the experience of making that episode. was one that we've. Doug Lewin (39:43.352)You guys went to the other border to the Red River. Mose Buchele (39:47.15)I think that one of the things that people still like are most fascinated by and maybe concerned about when it comes to the Texas grid is our relative lack of connection with other grids in neighboring states. we had, I'd heard even before probably, as an energy reporter, I just always kind of been aware that there was an attempt in the seventies to connect, to create a stronger interconnection between a utility in Texas with a utility in neighboring state. And that this was in fact done almost as a test case to kind of push the issue because there were people on both sides of that argument in Texas at the time. were utilities that wanted to interconnect and those that didn't. And not to get too deeply into it, but the reason was federal regulation. If you start moving massive amounts of electricity through these big transmission lines and synchronize with a neighboring grid, then that invites regulation from the feds. And a lot of people in Texas didn't want that. Again, other utilities may have seen a benefit to that. And certainly others argue that there's just simply a benefit for reliability to that. But all that is kind of maybe getting ahead of myself. What we do. Doug Lewin (40:58.944)You found the guy who made the Midnight Connection. It's amazing. Mose Buchele (41:04.014)Yeah, and I'll credit to Audrey to my colleague who's a co-host in this most recent season. She looked through some old hearing documents and I don't know if they were hearings at the PUC or court documents and found this man who had worked for this utility. They made a connection to a place called, I think it's called Vernon, Texas, I'm not mistaken. yeah. Birthplace. We decided to drive up there and Ullman King was his name and we had not. Doug Lewin (41:07.873)A COAST! You did yeah Mose Buchele (41:33.41)I don't think that we had gotten a response from him. Maybe we had emailed him. We decided to drive to Vernon just to see where this happened. Maybe try to talk to some people there. We're thinking maybe there are some like old timers, right? Who just remember. And we showed up in the town and everyone's like, nah, man, we, know, this is, this happened. This is something that kind of happened in secret, you know, 50 years ago. people are like, there's no monument. There's a monument to Roy Orbison. There's not a monument to the Midnight Connection. But on the way there, we found an address. And Audrey went knocked on this guy's door and he was there and just happy, know, happy to have us in. We went and visited him the next day and he recounted the entire story, this entire... He wasn't there when they did it, but he was the guy who was going to present legal papers, the second the connections made to essentially kind of prompt what was going to be a big legal battle, a big regulatory battle. Doug Lewin (42:13.11)of actually stringing a wire. Mose Buchele (42:32.256)And in fact, it dovetails nicely with, we were talking about Lynn Olson earlier, the public utility commission in Texas was just a a baby state agency then, right? So this happens right around the time when the public utility commission comes out. Yeah, yeah. And this case falls in their lap. And the PUC was very hostile to the idea of interconnection. And indeed, eventually, Doug Lewin (42:48.193)that a year. Mose Buchele (42:59.142)you know, not to give the whole story away, but they, you know, they reach something of a negotiation, but really set the precedent for what we have today, which is a grid that is not tightly linked with any neighboring grids, unlike any other state in, you know, in the lower 48 states at least. Doug Lewin (43:15.404)Definitely everybody listened to that episode. It's amazing and and really again like you're right Audrey played a huge role in that one and like the as she hasn't so many of them but the the way you guys kind of tell the story and you're even like on the road going up there like the the way the process is kind of start it was part of it is a lot of fun briefly tell us a little about the black start one because I think that again like folks don't really understand how, we were actually quite close during winter storm. You're like, this is still the language even sort of like gets to how little folks understand this. Cause we all use the term like, you know, blackout. was actually technically rolling out. It it felt like it was a complete blackout. Cause people were without power for days. But actually that term means you've lost the whole grid. And it could be down for weeks or months. And then you have to try to bring it back. again, like you can read up on this stuff. You can find technical reports, but to listen to a 20 or 30 minute podcast, give us the short version of that. Then folks can listen to the longer version. Mose Buchele (44:16.622)Yeah, yeah. And I mean, this is like what they also refer to as a of a catastrophic grid failure. This is where, as bad as what we had in 2021 was, there is the possibility that a power grid completely crashes to the point where it almost breaks into its different constituent parts. Like when you think about electricity grid, it requires a constant balance of supply and demand on the transmission systems. And all the different things that go into that grid, from power generators to substations, even to the things in your house that run off that electricity, they're synchronized to that flow, to that beat of power as it moves. And if that beat stops working, stops being steady, everything breaks apart. And then you really don't have a grid system anymore. You don't have a system of transporting electricity. And in many cases, you don't have a way of generating it too, if it's damaged your power generators. So what a black start is, is the program that is in place to re, and I think about it in terms of light almost, like re illuminate the grid, re power, recharge the grid, re-energize the grid, right? You know, as you're trying to get, get the system running again. And what that requires you to do is, is, you know, begin in one place, you know, you start generating electricity in one place. And then start kind of charging the wires again, moving it along only in so far as it's balanced where it can reach the required demand again and starting in several different places at once, re-energizing the entire system, which can take weeks to do. depending on how much damage is caused by the grid failure, it can be, it is almost inconceivable how tragic a historical event that would be in Texas. Doug Lewin (46:10.488)I quoted Pat Wood, the former chair of the PUC and chair of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission saying it would be like being in the stone age again. Yeah, yeah. I mean, just to give an example to folks, you can't fill up your car at the gas station. You think, well, gas, that's not the electric grid, but it's a pump. It needs electricity. You can't even drive out of the state unless you had filled up before and you have enough range in your gas car to get out of the state, right? I mean, it would have been an absolute... Doug Lewin (46:37.656)Catastrophe. is, the way though, one of the things I'm most excited about, well, there's so many reasons to be excited about battery storage, but batteries work really well for Black Start because they can be supply and demand. And when you're trying to balance them, they can go both ways, which generator can't and generally load can't, but batteries can do both. It's also a reason why like distributed energy resources having the backup power packages, which the legislature passed as a policy. If the grid goes down and you're able to island, right? You're a hospital, you're a water treatment facility, you're a police station. In that situation, you would still have power. like there's, I think the knowledge that we were so close to that for, what was it? Four minutes, 37 seconds, right? That away from that has spurred some positive change. And I think this is where I wanna go next, Doug Lewin (47:28.352)Again, you're as deep into this as anybody, as a reporter and journalist talking to people all the time, you know, putting these stories together, you know, separating wheat from chaff to be able to really tell the story in your estimation. Like what has changed for the better at this point? Are we better off than before winter storm Uri and, and related to that? Doug Lewin (47:49.718)What hasn't been done? This is the question I get asked all the time. It's so fun to ask this question instead of being asked it. like, yeah, what are we better at and where has there been improvement and where has there not been? Where do we still need to see some progress to get towards a grid where we wouldn't have to worry about it every time it gets super cold? Mose Buchele (48:07.15)Yeah, mean, yeah, it's such a tricky, tricky question to answer. I mean, I think obviously the first thing people point to is weatherization or winterization. There has finally and belatedly, probably most likely, definitely, well, I mean, in my opinion, definitely belatedly, been an effort after 2021 to really put teeth on and do inspections for things like power plants and energy infrastructure. Mose Buchele (48:32.248)that could simply break down in the cold. And that's low-hanging fruit, but it's exceptionally important. And it seems to have helped. There are things like backup power and I was talking about those big fuel storage tanks that were more common decades and decades ago. Well, some of the answers that we've come across have been to kind of re-explore some of those options, right? So now there is more incentive for having dual fuel capabilities at power plants. Doug Lewin (48:58.678)Yeah, there is a program that PUC started called Firm Fuel Supply Service, which is exactly that. So what's old is new again. Mose Buchele (49:05.55)Yeah, yeah, you know, which if it works, you know, it works. you know, things like that should supply a little extra insurance. The most complicated part of this for me and maybe for you two, although I think that you've done a great job explaining it to me before in some of our previous interviews, is just are the different market changes that have happened. mean, like this is you can look on paper and say, well, they've made these costly changes to the way that energy is kept in reserve. They've invested more. in all these different programs with kind of incomprehensible names to keep more energy in reserve in case things get tight. And so there's a huge debate over like the kind of cost benefit of all that. But, know, we've seen, I think a little less scarcity than maybe we would have otherwise if some of that hadn't been in place. I'm not exactly, you know, advocating for it, but it does seem that those things have changed the dynamics a bit. Places where we have not seen a lot of movement, you and I have talked a lot and you've, you have talked a lot about energy efficiency, you know, for years and years and years. And that's something that seems as, you know, I interviewed you in the podcast, we had a bonus episode about this very issue and, and it seems one of the least costly and obvious ways of trying to bolster our power system that has been really not sufficiently addressed. And, you know, maybe There's always this session or next session or whatever, but there just seems to be some kind of intrinsic part of the political equation that makes that a hard nut to crack. And then obviously there's this thing that we're focusing on this season, looking at the kind of disjuncture that I want to say disconnect, but that's a disconnect. You can say disconnect. That's right. Between the, if we are going to, this is one of the central kind of questions of this season. If we're going to try to continue to reinvest in natural gas generation, as indeed our political leadership really is keen to do, in part because it is dispatchable, right? You know, they say, well, these are generators, on-off switches, and you can deploy them when we need the electricity. It is perhaps advisable to take a closer look at what went wrong with the natural gas system. in this massive power failure. And so that's really kind of where we're heading with this season. There were a lot of proposals on the table in the wake of the 2021 blackout to even relatively modest suggestions to kind of create a little more transparency in what's going on with gas, create what they were calling a gas desk or some type of a monitor at ERCOT that would take a closer look. Doug Lewin (51:48.906)No, no, but nobody at ERCOT or the PUC mentions the, the, word gas desk is, is verboten at this point, or you get into trouble for speaking it. I can say it. They need a gas desk at ERCOT. I mean, literally this was just an effort to like have awareness of what is going on in the gas fields, because that is, to say it's not transparent. I mean, it's the opposite. It's opaque. You don't know in real time what is going on out there. And if you're a grid operator and you need gas, In the wintertime especially, gas is a predominant fuel on our system and they don't know what's going on in the gas fields. then somebody tries, know, Brad Jones, who you interviewed in some of the episodes, may he rest in peace, former CEO of ERCOT, talked about this a lot. Like we have to have visibility into that. And you would have thought you said, we are regulating every aspect of the industry, price controls, all of it. You would have thought it was the most heavy-handed. They literally just wanted a desk in their control room to monitor gas. And it was treated like it was the biggest insult in the history of human. Mose Buchele (52:56.468)I just had a flashback because I interviewed Brad Jones in this room. He might have been sitting at this part of the table. you know, one of the things we touched on was this very issue. Yeah. And he was very articulate and open about that. I just recently, as part of my work on this new season, went back and listened to some of those hearings that happened a couple of years ago now on proposals for things like a gas desk and then some other maybe a little bit more far reaching legislation that would have just taken a look at some of the Mose Buchele (53:25.218)the market power of pipelining companies and gas suppliers. as you said, the gas desk idea was, it really was treated like somebody had set off a bomb, you know, and it's the kind of thing that exists in other places and seems to not interfere with. Doug Lewin (53:40.44)So sorry, got, yeah, yeah, yeah, I got us off on a tangent, but the point is like, that is an area of the energy system. And this is kind of really what you're getting into in season three. And disconnect is the right word. There is a disconnect between gas and electric. It is better than it was during your year. I think that that is true. There is more coordination going on between the railroad commission and the PUC, more communication, more awareness, but there is still a very significant disconnect that is frankly dangerous. Mose Buchele (54:10.552)Yeah, yeah, and this is something that, like I said, this is where we are focused this season. And it's been a wild ride. Doug Lewin (54:17.43)Yeah, yeah, yeah. I'm also just curious whether you get into it this season or it could be, I hope there's many, many more seasons of The Disconnect. I think I am like your target market, Moze. I love, I am consuming these episodes as much as you could put them out. But you know, there's this question of like who profited as well, right? And like, then you get into this whole notion, which you've already got into some in the first few episodes of the intrastate pipelines that do not have regulation from FERC. Doug Lewin (54:46.562)So they're only regulated by the railroad commission. There were some famous hearings in 2022, famous to me anyway, where then chairman Wayne Christian said, well, we don't regulate those. And it's like, well, but if it's a monopoly and the feds don't regulate it and you don't regulate it, who regulates it? And of course the answer is nobody. Mose Buchele (55:07.718)Yeah, I mean, and this is to get back to kind of our wonky discussion of regulated utilities at the beginning of our conversation. You know, if you're going to restructure or deregulate, on one hand, you may give up some price control, you know, which is what they obviously didn't, you federal energy deregulation starting on a Carter. But you also are supposed to break up that monopoly, right? You know, like you need both parts of it, right? You can't have the monopoly hanging out there then without any kind of Mose Buchele (55:37.262)guardrails put on how they exercise that monopoly power. And what you hear over and over again from people through history. And again, this is, you know, this is most recently come up in the context of post 2021, but it seems like every decade, this, this kind of rises its head up in out of sometimes out of the oil field. Sometimes it's oil, it's, it's producers, it's gas and oil producers that are saying in Texas, we need to take a closer look at pipeline market power because they feel like they're getting taken advantage of. Mose Buchele (56:07.016)And sometimes it's on the other end of the pipeline. It's someone like a natural gas power plant operator saying, we are negotiating these contracts with zero position of power. And again, so you started hearing that again. You hear it, like I said, through the history of this regulation, you started hearing it again after the blackout. again, just is not something, there were efforts that were made last session and you hear people still talking about it, but it's Doug Lewin (56:34.222)Absolutely, yeah, but nothing's really changed from that. No, and I think it's a great point because a lot of times people will talk about the oil and gas industry and it's really important to look at its component parts. You're absolutely right. A lot of times, and again, this goes back to like 1930s and some of the original regulation from the railroad commission, the producers were upset with the pipelines. This stuff runs deep. And to understand like what's going on today, to understand what happened during winter storm Uri, to understand why your power bill might be more, your gas bill might be more. Doug Lewin (57:02.348)you gotta understand that, that history. it's just, you know, the word story is in history. And I think you guys have just done a great job with, with the storytelling. So big fan of what you do. I think this is probably a good place to, to leave it, but I, but I'll ask you as I, as I do every guest of the Energy Capital podcast, what should I have asked you that I didn't? Any, anything, any, is there, is there anything else? And it's okay to say. Doug Lewin (57:24.366)No, Doug, this was the greatest interview ever. No, I'm just kidding. But no, no, like if we've said everything you want to say, that's fine, but I always want to give you an opportunity. Is there anything else you want to leave the audience with? Mose Buchele (57:34.796)Man, I feel like this has been pretty far reaching, but I... Doug Lewin (57:38.83)Mo's, I'll ask you this just in closing. you guys are obviously, there's stories and it's human stories. Can you think back to over the seasons, a particular human story that like really kind of got you? Mose Buchele (57:54.158)I mean, there are so many of those that. Doug Lewin (57:56.17)I know there are but you gotta pick one. Mose Buchele (57:59.032)I mean, the story that sticks with me the most is probably the story of a family who lost their mother during the blackout. She was an elderly woman who, this is a family, the Shaw family, they live here in Austin, and the siblings were caretakers for their elderly parents and they lost power and maintained heat in their house because they had a gas fireplace, actually. So, one of those, you heard a lot of people talking about how much they appreciated having that option during those cold days. But it was not enough to, know, seemingly to heat their full house and they lost their mother during that crisis. they were so, and remain to this day, opened to, they shared their story so well and invited us into their home and told us all about their mom. And, you know, I think about her, you know, every time the anniversary comes up. And actually I just called one of the, daughter's just a few weeks ago, just to check in. yeah, there are thousands and thousands of stories of hardship and loss that we should keep with us, you know, because you never want to see something like that happen. Doug Lewin (59:15.978)Absolutely. I think that's a very important guiding light like North Star is to remember that 247 Texans, at least probably more like eight or 900 lost their lives. And it is critical we get this right, you know, as much as possible. And I think your reporting has gone a long way to do that. So thanks for everything you do. And thanks for being on the Energy Capital podcast. Thanks most. Mose Buchele (59:41.045)Thank you, Doug. Doug Lewin (59:43.074)Thank you for listening to the Energy Capital Podcast. I hope you enjoyed the episode. If you did, please like, rate, and review wherever you listen to your podcasts. Until next time, have a great day. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.douglewin.com/subscribe

What if utilities could see infrastructure failures before they happen? What if grid operators, regulators, and energy companies could harness the power of artificial intelligence to prevent outages?Heat waves, droughts, wildfires, hurricanes, and winter cold snaps are getting more extreme. But as their intensity ramps up, so does computing power, and particularly the capabilities of artificial intelligence.In this episode of the Energy Capital Podcast, I spoke with Mary Cleary, VP, Marketing, Communications & Public Policy at Neara, a company pioneering AI-driven predictive modeling for utilities and grid planners and operators. Their technology is already helping major power providers anticipate and mitigate damage before storms, wildfires, and grid failures occur.We discussed how Neara’s platform builds hyper-detailed digital models of the grid, down to individual poles, wires, and even the exact species of trees near power lines. Using LIDAR scans and AI classification, utilities can create real-time risk maps that help prioritize maintenance, allowing them to proactively prevent outages before they happen rather than reacting after the fact.This technology is already delivering results. In Houston, Neara’s partnership with CenterPoint Energy has cut processes that once took a year and a half down to just a few hours. Rather than relying on slow, manual inspections, utilities can now simulate storm impacts and predict which infrastructure is most vulnerable before a storm makes landfall.AI is also changing the way utilities manage wildfire risk. By analyzing environmental conditions like wind speeds, temperatures, vegetation density, and the age and vulnerability of equipment, Neara’s models help utilities pinpoint the highest-risk areas, allowing for targeted prevention measures instead of costly, broad-stroke fixes.Beyond disaster response, we also explored the role of AI in grid modernization and demand forecasting. With Texas’ rapid energy demand growth, driven in part by AI data centers and industrial expansion, utilities need smarter ways to anticipate and manage electricity needs. Predictive modeling using artificial intelligence is giving them that capability.One of the most fascinating parts of our conversation was how AI can help utilities make more cost-effective investments. Instead of replacing entire sections of aging infrastructure, Neara’s software allows for surgical upgrades—determining exactly which poles need reinforcement, which lines need reconductoring, and where distributed energy resources could provide the most resilience.AI is often discussed as a massive new energy consumer, but as Mary pointed out, there’s far less conversation about how AI can be a critical tool for making the grid more efficient and reliable.This episode provides an exciting look at the future of grid resilience, extreme weather preparedness, and how AI is changing the way we think about energy infrastructure.As always, please like, share, and leave a five-star review wherever you listen to podcasts. Thank you for being part of the conversation!Timestamps00:00 – Introduction: AI, predictive modeling & the future of the grid01:58 – What is Neara? AI-driven modeling for utilities & extreme weather response04:33 – Case study: CenterPoint partnership (Houston’s 27,000 miles of lines)06:30 – How AI interprets LiDAR & optimizes storm recovery09:30 – Reliability vs. Resiliency: Measuring grid performance, customer expectations12:33 – AI disaster modeling: Hurricanes, floods & wildfire case studies15:45 – LiDAR & Dynamic Line Rating (DLR): Unlocking hidden grid capacity18:00 - Could AI help relieve the transmission constraints that contributed to energy emergency on September 6, 2023?20:1 6 – Winter storms & gas infrastructure: Predicting failures before they happen23:00 – Optimizing energy resource placement: AI’s role in siting generation resources24:22 – AI’s next areas of development and limitations & regulatory roadblocks28:00 – Flaws in reliability metrics (SAIDI & SAIFI) & need for predictive benchmarks33:34 – Balancing cost, reliability & AI-driven efficiency36:01 – Effective policy constructs for reliability and resiliency38:24 – AI, Senate Bill 6 & large load growth: The power of micro-solutions43:21 – House Bill 2555 & Texas grid investments: Balancing cost, data & outcomes46:45 – Regulatory innovation & final thoughts on AI-driven transformation48:18 – Conclusion & call to action ShownotesFurther Reading from the Texas Energy & Power Newsletter* You Get What You Pay For: Let’s Pay Utilities for Performance* Large Loads at the Lege: Grid Roundup #40* Texas’ Energy Future: A Conversation with Jimmy GlotfeltyAI-Powered Grid Resilience & Predictive Modeling* Neara’s Website – Explore Neara’s AI-driven platform for grid infrastructure modeling and predictive analytics.* How Neara Uses AI for Utility Infrastructure – Detailed breakdown of Neara’s AI capabilities, including digital twins and predictive risk assessment.* Neara Platform Overview* How Neara Works* Hurricane Preparedness Utilizing a 3D Digital Twin* LiDAR Utilization for Utilities* CenterPoint Energy & Neara Collaboration – Announcement of their partnership to enhance grid resilience in Greater Houston following Hurricane Beryl.* AI for Grid Optimization – The International Energy Agency's insights on AI’s growing role in modern energy systems.* Why AI and Energy Are the New Power Couple* Electricity Grids and Secure Energy TransitionsAI & Wildfire Risk Mitigation* Neara’s Wildfire Risk Modeling – How AI helps utilities predict and mitigate wildfire risks.* Neara’s Collaboration with Southern California Edison (SCE)* CenterPoint Energy & Technosylva Collaboration – Using predictive analytics for wildfire and extreme weather preparation.* How AI is Being Used to Fight Wildfires – A look at AI’s role in early detection and prevention.* AI-Powered Camera Networks for California Wildfires* Google’s Satellite Surveillance initiative (FireSat)* USC Scientists Use AI to Predict Wildfire’s Next MoveAI and Demand Forecasting for Energy Grids* Artificial Intelligence for Energy – U.S. Department of Energy’s take on how AI is shaping power grids.* How AI Can Help Clean Energy Meet Growing Electricity Demand* DOE Advancing Safe and Secure AI Research Infrastructure Through the National Artificial Intelligence Research Resource Pilot* DOE Announces New Actions to Enhance America’s Global Leadership in Artificial IntelligenceTranscriptMary Cleary (00:01.982)And what we're seeing so far already is that CenterPoint has been able to compress processes that once took them a year and a half down to just a few hours. Doug Lewin (00:13.134)How long do you think it takes a utility to figure out which power lines will fall in the next big storm? Days or weeks? You think maybe months? In many cases, it's actually years. And with extreme weather happening more frequently and customers expecting power back in hours, not days, the old ways just aren't cutting it anymore. But what if AI could predict grid failures before they happen? What if utilities had a digital model of every single power line, pole and tree so they could prepare for hurricanes, floods, wildfires, winter storms, whatever nature may throw at us before disaster strikes? This actually does exist. And that's actually what we're talking about in today's episode of the Energy Capital Podcast. I'm your host, Doug Loon, and my guest today is Mary Cleary, vice president at Nira, an AI-driven company revolutionizing grid reliability and resiliency. Today we'll break down AI's role in wildfire prevention, flood modeling, hurricanes and winter storms, why outdated reliability metrics are holding utilities and the industry back, how AI is changing the game for power markets and regulation as well. I'm excited about this one. It isn't just about technology. It's also about the future of the grid. Stick around because by the end, you'll know exactly why utilities that don't adapt will be left behind. As always, please like, rate, and review this podcast. Give us five stars wherever you listen, and please forward the episode on to friends and colleagues. It really does help people find us. Word of mouth is the most powerful, and we really appreciate your support of this podcast. Let's dive in. Hope you enjoy the show. Mary Cleary, welcome to the Energy Capital Podcast. Mary Cleary (02:00.056)Thank you so much, Doug. Really nice to see you. Great to meet you in person in Austin last week and really excited to be here. Doug Lewin (02:05.71)Yeah, it was great to see you in Austin. You guys pulled together a bunch of utilities to talk about what they're doing on resiliency and what you're doing on resiliency. This company, Nira, is really, really fascinating to me. Let's just start with a little explanation for the listeners as to what it is y'all do. Mary Cleary (02:23.95)Sure, yeah. So, Neera is a predictive modeling software platform that helps utilities take a more proactive approach to reliability and resiliency across the entire T &E system. So essentially what we do is we build a digital model of the whole network, including all the little details. you know, think things like the widths of the individual cables, the tree canopies, the fluctuations in ground slope, all those little nooks and crannies. Mary Cleary (02:49.888)And utilities then use that model to simulate scenarios they need to prepare for. So everything from ice storms to hurricanes, cetera. And that model then becomes a flexible environment for utilities to essentially test drive different types of remediation solutions. So once you have, for example, simulated what a category three could look like in your network, you might know which polls are going to fail. Mary Cleary (03:15.574)And what utilities might have once done is a simple rip and replace, right? Which as you can imagine can get quite expensive. But in our platform, what you're able to do is see that perhaps this, you know, force rank your risks and then match up solution by risk. So perhaps only a small percentage of those polls actually need to be replaced. And maybe of the, you the ones that don't, you know, maybe it's Mary Cleary (03:41.198)maybe you just need to add a stay and that's sufficient in the category three. And for the uninitiated, the stay is the thing that looks like hypotenus. Doug Lewin (03:48.142)Yeah. So we're going to get more into this as to different kinds of extreme weather events and what this works for. And I encourage folks to, we'll put a link in the show notes to a little video so people can actually see this. But so that people could get just kind of an understanding in their heads of what this is. This is, like you said, down to the individual wire, down to the actual, tell me if I'm wrong on this, but the species of tree and exactly how big it is. I mean, you're using LIDAR to get... Doug Lewin (04:18.218)extremely granular and take every single line in a utility service territory and the actual conditions on the ground so that then they can kind of rank order where they're going to go. Is that right? Yeah. So for Centerpoint, you guys announced a partnership with them. Centerpoint and Nira announced a partnership last fall. Mary Cleary (04:32.225)Exactly. Doug Lewin (04:42.83)And I was watching a news story about what y'all do with them. And I believe they said, I may be getting this wrong, but I think this is right. 27,000 miles worth of lines in their service territory. And Centerpoint actually has a fairly compact utility service territory. You start thinking about in Texas, Encore that has the entire Dallas, Fort Worth area, huge swaths of West Texas. Doug Lewin (05:07.48)To actually send people out and do visual inspections, which is what the utility industry has done forever, takes a long, long time and you just can't possibly get everywhere. So this is a use where AI can actually look at that whole system and figure out what the needs are. Can you talk a little bit about, and I know you're very early days, but there has been some press on this and some things you guys have said about it. Give a little glimpse for folks into what's going on in Houston. Mary Cleary (05:36.622)Yeah, absolutely. So while I can't comment on the specific things that Centerpoint is doing necessarily, what I can say is we're extremely excited about what we've seen so far. So, you know, in the broader scope of network governance processes, there are all these things that are very manual, as you alluded to. And what we're seeing so far already is that Centerpoint has been able to compress processes that once took them a year and a half down to just a few hours. Doug Lewin (06:06.68)So things that took a year and a half, basically getting people out to a site, recording what went on there, probably sending somebody back, having some kind of committee meeting. You're down to a couple hours because you are able to take this lidar and look at it. And then can you talk a little bit about, and this doesn't have to be specific to CenterPorter Houston, you're working globally, but how does AI figure into this? Because you guys are also an AI and machine learning company, correct? Mary Cleary (06:32.876)Yeah, yeah, great question. So the primary role of AI in our software is the classification of the lidar. So have you ever seen a raw lidar scan before? Have you ever seen a raw lidar scan? Doug Lewin (06:42.647)say it again. Doug Lewin (06:45.646)I'm not sure I have. Mary Cleary (06:47.374)It kind of looks like, you can Google image it, but depending on the quality of the LIDAR, it kind of looks like something between a Jackson Pollock painting or TV static, like kind of poltergeist-y. So it's not super intelligible. And the traditional processes for classifying LIDAR, which is what makes it actually usable, is manual, right? So someone actually sits and looks at the images and says, ah, this is a tree. Wait a minute, that tree looks about the same height as the distribution pole. It might be the same thing. Mary Cleary (07:15.47)It's very error prone, it's manual, and it takes a heck of a lot of time. So we're taking in LIDAR across an entire network. And what our AI does extremely well is classify that LIDAR automatically. So tree distribution poll and not just what's what, but like looking at the, you know, the sink depth of that tree and the fact that there might be multiple tree canopies layered over a line and be able to tell if there's a line under those tree canopies. Mary Cleary (07:43.394)So the primary role of the AI is in making sense of the actual network data. Doug Lewin (07:50.422)And then rank ordering, right? So it's really like a little bit of like a triage, right? Because you just, after Hurricane Barrel, right? There were so many problems and leaders all over the state, citizens all over their service territory saying, fix this, fix this, fix this. Well, you can't go to every single line and trim every single tree in the space of a few months. You have to know where the, what is the tree that is most likely to fall on a line? Can you talk about how you guys figure that out? Mary Cleary (08:19.63)Yeah, yeah, 100%. So I think you just raised a really, really important point, which is that when you're doing these processes manually, you're sending teams out into the field, you're only covering, you know, an inspector and a team can cover maybe like 80 to 100 polls in a visit, depending on the complexity and such. But, and then they're answering 100 questions per poll in some cases, right? So like, you see in that given field visit, you might come across a vegetation risk that is, you know, Mary Cleary (08:49.25)within, it's under two feet from a line, right? But then one circuit over or even 100, maybe it's one mile down the road, there's something that's six inch clearance risk. And you don't see that otherwise. the way you, it's all relative, right? Like it's whatever the biggest risk is that day is highly unlikely to be the thing that actually requires resources and attention. Doug Lewin (09:13.582)It's so fascinating. mean, it's just, it really is. You know, it's so interesting in the energy world, everybody these days is talking about AI and everybody's talking about AI in terms of the power demand that it has, right? my God, AI is going to crash the grid because it needs so much power. But I feel like there isn't nearly enough discussion. I brought this up on a couple of podcasts recently. I did on the one I recorded with a former commissioner, Jimmy Glodfelt as well. Doug Lewin (09:40.782)There's not nearly enough discussion on the use cases for AI to actually make the grid more reliable and more resilient. You and I have talked before, I know you have some thoughts about this. Could you talk a little bit about reliability and resiliency and even how you define those terms? I you are a company that is specifically devoted to those and I feel like sometimes we don't spend enough time defining terms. And when one person says reliability, Doug Lewin (10:08.386)They may be talking to somebody who thinks about it entirely differently. What do these terms mean to you and how are they the same? are they different, reliability and resiliency? Mary Cleary (10:16.79)Yeah, sure. So, you know, obviously, neither of them are new terms, right? But they're both increasingly becoming moving targets. And something that's been really encouraging to see, I think, is both utilities and policymakers actually think about how both of them need to be approached with a different or increased level of rigor, right? So on the resiliency side of things, the asset hardening capital allocation framework that maybe worked beautifully five to 10 years ago probably needs a rethink. Mary Cleary (10:45.41)And on the reliability side of things, you can no longer just look at safety and call it a day. Safety is, it doesn't actually include in many cases the severe weather impacts, right? So you're essentially excluding all the stuff that makes the biggest impact on the system and only looking at, excuse me, duration and frequency in quote, unquote, normal course operations. And so... Mary Cleary (11:10.008)You know, the other dynamic at play is loan growth, right? So objectively slash obviously that creates more demand that the system needs to service. But a vastly underappreciated dynamic there is what does that do to customer expectations? So customer expectations are, they're going up. They're not getting more forgiving. So we ran one of our recent consumer polls where a third of Americans Mary Cleary (11:37.366)said that they expect power to be restored after severe weather within one to two hours, and another third said they expected the same within three to five hours. Doug Lewin (11:46.518)Is that even possible? that a completely unrealistic expectation, or do think it's actually possible? Mary Cleary (11:51.33)I think it's, I mean, it's not gonna happen overnight, right? But I do think it's not impossible over the right time scale. Doug Lewin (11:59.522)It also depends what kind of extreme weather we're talking about, right? If it's a category five and you're on the quote unquote dirty side of it, right? The east side of a category five in the northern hemisphere. Are you in Australia? Mary Cleary (12:13.676)No, I'm in the Northeast. Doug Lewin (12:15.534)You're in the Northeast. Okay, okay. It's an Australian company, which is why asked that. But if you're the Southern Hemisphere, I guess it would work the other way. But anyway, the Northern Hemisphere, you're on the Eastern side and you get a category five, like one to two hours is probably completely unrealistic. But I think there are a lot of events where that could be possible. So are you guys actually like... So a hurricane is, for instance, forming in the Gulf of Mexico and you're a Texas coastal... Doug Lewin (12:44.75)city or utility that covers a Texas coast, if they were using you guys, could they actually put that storm with its features into AI and then into your AI engine and then actually see, if it goes this way at this level, this is the path it's going to take so they can pre-position crews and things like that? Is that a use? Mary Cleary (13:09.006)Exactly, exactly. So what you're describing is a use case we're really, really familiar with. we've got, so actually, did you, I don't know if you had a chance to speak with South Australia Power Networks at the event last week. Doug Lewin (13:20.718)heard his presentation. Yeah, was fascinating. So that was a flood situation, Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Tell us about that. Mary Cleary (13:27.798)Yeah, so what you're describing is a very, very similar scenario where we had a flood model kind of pre-set up that the model actually existed and this flood was coming in and they were able to layer on in real time those conditions. So as if that storm in the Gulf is brewing. So you essentially bring that situation to life in real time in the model and you see exactly where the water levels are going to get dangerously high, where you need to... Mary Cleary (13:55.352)de-energize or it's safe to re-energize and to your point where you can send people where it's safe. Doug Lewin (14:01.23)amazing. So we've talked about a couple of use cases, floods, hurricanes. Wildfires is another one I think is probably an obvious use case for this too. Can you guys talk about how you're trying to mitigate wildfire damage? Mary Cleary (14:17.806)Yeah, for sure. know, wildfire is such a multifaceted challenge, right? It's not, it's not a, you know, it often gets pinned on veg and veg is certainly a part of it, right? But that's really just one part of it. There's asset failures, there's design flaws, there's a lot that can and does go wrong. So in terms of how we mitigate vegetation, it's typically vegetation, sorry, wildfire risk. It's that typically a combination of a utility using our model. Mary Cleary (14:46.092)to combat their risk on all relevant fronts. Doug Lewin (14:50.03)So with Wildfire, you're trying to... I'm trying to think of what you would input into that model when you're dealing with the hurricane. I think everybody can kind of picture it. You've seen the images of the eye and the clouds and the rain and all that around it. But with Wildfire, it's a little tougher. You're trying to deal with what are the wind speeds? What is the humidity? Are these all inputs that you can enter into the platform? Mary Cleary (15:18.112)Yeah, so some that come to mind off the bat are wind speeds for sure, but also conductor temperature, right? So when the conductors get hotter, you know, on hot days when wildfires more likely, they are more likely to sag and come into contact with things like vegetation or a structure, potentially worse and ignite. So we're doing all that very granular clearance modeling to figure out where that's actually a risk. Doug Lewin (15:45.614)So do you guys actually, I'm just gonna ask the stupid questions, because sometimes the stupid questions are the ones everybody's wondering and just is afraid to ask, but I won't be afraid. The stupid question here is, have you guys, with LIDAR, you just have the whole globe or do you have to go, like somebody hires you and then you do their section of the world, or is this model just has everything in it already? Mary Cleary (16:08.526)Yeah, no, so we don't actually capture LIDAR utilities. Sometimes they have it already. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes they'll capture LIDAR in advance of working with us because the model requires it. Doug Lewin (16:20.206)Describe exactly what LIDAR is. I think I understand what radar is, but explain to me exactly what LIDAR is. Mary Cleary (16:26.286)Yeah, sure. So starting with the acronym, the fun part, LIDAR stands for light detection and ranging. And essentially what it is, is imagine a bunch of lasers shooting off of, sometimes it can be, sometimes it's a helicopter, sometimes it's a fixed wing aircraft or drone even in some cases, or a handheld device. But picture laser shooting off of some device that hit whatever is in front of them, right? So that could be the ground, it could be a wire, it could be a pole. And they bounce back. Mary Cleary (16:54.664)onto the device that is doing the capture and takes measurements of that distance. And so because it's measuring distance, it's fundamentally really, really good at solving for 3D questions versus imagery, which definitely has its place and role in all of this, but is more 2D. Doug Lewin (17:18.743)Got it. When you were talking about line sag, and you said it can get very granular, that led me to think, I'm wondering if this actually has, and maybe you're already doing this, maybe it's just something that's on the roadmap or something you wouldn't do at all, but the dynamic line rating gets talked about a lot in Texas. I've written about it before. Folks that are regular readers of the newsletter will remember probably. Doug Lewin (17:46.04)depending on how long they've been regular readers, but it was one of the most read pieces I ever wrote was on September 7th, the day after the only energy emergency Texas has had since winter storm Uri. And on that day, there was a decision made by ERCOT to actually reduce the amount of power flowing over a line. And the thought was, well, we could Doug Lewin (18:10.914)we could overload that line. It was really hot. This was September 6th. It was still extremely hot. And they were worried that they were going to overload that line. But my understanding is that their sort of dynamic line rating for those just listening, I'm doing air quotes right now, is not super dynamic. They take a couple of different buckets. And like if it's over this temperature, we turn it down this much. But if you actually had measurements and AI modeling, you might find you could flow more power over those lines. You might. Doug Lewin (18:40.404)I you could flow less power over those lines, but you would have... Is that a use case for either what you do or other AI engines? Mary Cleary (18:49.184)Yes, absolutely. And we do do that. We do do that. yeah, I mean, what you're describing is, I think a common, one of the reasons this hasn't been done in the past, right, a common challenge with this is like, it's totally impractical, right, to send someone out in the field and manually measure the distance between the graph clearance of every wire, particularly at distribution, which is, I think, totally, totally underappreciated component to overall network capacity. Mary Cleary (19:16.096)And so when we talk about modeling those granular clearances, that's exactly what it is. So sometimes our customers will find that there are bottlenecks, e.g. clearance requirements where they can't run the line any harder without reaching clearance. But what those bottlenecks can then become is potentially a punch list of things that they can do, design modifications to their network, where they can then actually run more power. Doug Lewin (19:40.834)reconducting things like that. Mary Cleary (19:42.68)Exactly, Mary Cleary (19:43.121)exactly. Or maybe, maybe reconducting, but also, or maybe, you know, what if we made this poll a little bit taller? Would that work? Doug Lewin (19:51.17)Very interesting. And do you actually need physical sensors on the line for that or can AI sort of handle that knowing what the line is and what the temperature and humidity is? Mary Cleary (20:02.86)Yeah, so we don't rely on physical sensors for that. Doug Lewin (20:06.476)It can entirely be done with AI. It's so fascinating how quickly the world is changing. It's such a challenge just to even try to keep up. It's amazing. Yeah. OK, I want to ask about a couple other use cases. Winter storms, that's something people in Texas think about sometimes. Yeah, is there a use case there? Mary Cleary (20:30.05)Yeah, absolutely. So ice loading is something that comes up quite a bit. And it really comes down to the same variables, essentially, as the pull load, the tension on the line, and temperature. So freezing temperatures, what that looks like, what precipitation looks like, and wind. Doug Lewin (20:48.942)Yeah, so that would deal with what is obviously a very real problem. It's not talked about as much, but February, 2023. Obviously, February, 2021 was Winter Storm Uri. February, 2023 sometimes referred to as Winter Storm Mara or Mara. I've never actually heard which way it's supposed to be pronounced. But in Austin and other utilities around central Texas, they had a ton of ice really started to cause tree branches to fall. So again, that's sort of a... Doug Lewin (21:17.678)an obvious use case for this. I'm also just wondering about there's a winter storm coming, you're looking at temperatures in the Permian of a certain level. Can you get into modeling what might happen to gas infrastructure? Could you get into modeling what demand actually might look like, which is an area ERCOT has really struggled with? And I've been critical of them for that, but frankly, that's really hard to do. You have to really understand the building stock. Doug Lewin (21:47.182)Can you start to get into how much power will actually be needed and where are the areas where it's most likely that you would see problems with power infrastructure, gas infrastructure, et cetera? Mary Cleary (22:02.092)Yeah, absolutely. you know, one of the things that's great about our technology is it can be used to, it's very good at modeling physical assets. And so whatever the physical asset makeup is, it's very adept at identifying risks therein. And in terms of like system-wide modeling, one of the things that's also great about our technology is the ability to answer questions that go upstream and downstream across the, across the energy supply chain, right? So like coming back to your point on Mary Cleary (22:32.194)reliability earlier, I think something that is changing in how we talk about reliability is not just obviously looking beyond safety and including things like severe weather, but looking all the way downstream to things like generation mix and understanding how does that affect customer outage minutes from a resource availability perspective. Doug Lewin (22:51.906)Tell me more about that. Yeah, what is, I mean, I know what that means, but like, how does that factor into an AI engine that is mapping? I don't, I understand what you mean, I don't understand the connection. Mary Cleary (23:03.244)Yeah, sure. So what I'm saying is, you know, obviously the energy ecosystem is very complex, right? Lots of moving parts. And that's one of the reasons why it's so hard to make better, faster decisions. in helping utilities forecast resiliency, we're looking at all those moving parts and how they turn together. And it's almost like the AI plays this role of a programmatic dial that you can turn up or down to look at reliability and resilience risk. Mary Cleary (23:33.046)evaluate objectively how much of that risk is there and how much and what does it cost to buy it down. Doug Lewin (23:39.416)That's so interesting. So you could then conceivably, when you're talking about resource mix, you could look at, this would be an area where on a certain, say, a side of a transmission line, maybe there's a constraint. This would be a great place for battery storage to go. Or you have so much battery storage in this one particular place, but there's really no gas resources here. This would be a place to look to put a gas peaker. Doug Lewin (24:07.086)I'd assume there'd be a big relevance there for distributed energy resources too. We can't put any really large infrastructure in this particular place, but maybe some customer-sided stuff would be a particularly good solution. exactly. How far along... I think part of what I'm trying to understand, and I'm sure everybody listening is trying to understand, is how far along is AI on this at this point? Because I think Neera, it's safe to say, is... Doug Lewin (24:36.814)state of the art, you guys have been at this for what, seven, eight years, you're through a series C, you have a bunch of different deployments, but it still feels like this is early days. Like there's just like the advancements are probably going to like... So what are the next areas where you're excited, where you're like, I can't wait to see what AI will do with fill in the blank? Mary Cleary (25:00.974)So that's excellent question. Mary Cleary (25:05.474)You know, I think that there's a lot to be excited about, but I think there's also a lot to be cautious of, right? AI is, I'll use the hackney phrase because it's true, but it's not the silver bullet. And there's a change management journey that goes along with adopting AI, right? it's, can't, like, in other words, I guess an example of what I'm saying is you can't suddenly... Mary Cleary (25:31.054)cover much more ground in your network inspections, right? Or you can't suddenly discover 100 risks where you were only able to previously see one to 10 at a time and then not be able to do anything about it. So there need to be surrounding processes or infrastructure, not in the physical sense of the horse, but that actually support these processes. So that's one thing I would say about it. But I think the bigger opportunity is something I'm extremely excited about. Mary Cleary (26:00.622)is that AI can actually help between both utilities and policymakers help encourage and really drive this idea of a proactive approach to resiliency and reliability, which I don't think is controversial. don't think anyone thinks that's a ridiculous statement. But unfortunately, the reality says otherwise, where a lot of the processes and regulation that are in place today actually actively discourage taking a proactive approach. Mary Cleary (26:29.41)And think Eric, Brian. Doug Lewin (26:31.402)Yeah, what's an example of that? That makes sense. Mary Cleary (26:34.318)typical of that Mary Cleary (26:34.918)is California, there's something they not so affectionately call the 45-day rule, and I'm sure there are examples of this in other states as well. But it's essentially that if you discover a risk, you have 45 days to actually remediate it, which is fine. It sounds sensible, right? No one wants risks lingering out there unattended. Except that is essentially, how is that different from playing Whack-A-Mole? You find a risk, you fix it. You find a risk, you fix it. Doug Lewin (26:54.614)Festering, yeah. Mary Cleary (27:02.456)What if that risk that you're suddenly pouring all of your resources into at that moment isn't what you actually need to be paying attention to? Doug Lewin (27:09.11)It may not be the biggest risk at all. There could be a bigger risk somewhere else, but you found it 20 days into that 45-day period, and so you let it go. Mary Cleary (27:17.526)Exactly. And even worse, what if there are a hundred or a thousand versions of that same risk and in aggregate, there's a more cost-effective way to solve that risk. Mary Cleary (27:29.73)instead of just doing it one off. Doug Lewin (27:32.27)It brings me, you when you're a hammer, everything's a nail. But this brings me back to it. I wrote a piece on this like not quite a year ago. was right after Hurricane Barrel about you get what you pay for. And starting to think about performance-based models where we're really paying utilities a lot more if they do their jobs exceptionally and less if they're not. I won't ask you to weigh in on that, but I do think there is some merit in that because then you can get out of that sort of... Doug Lewin (27:57.454)hamster wheel of the way things have been done and it just has to be done this way as opposed to putting the focus on the outcome you actually want to drive towards. do, want to ask you about, you've mentioned a couple times, Sadie and Safie, and I think probably most of our listeners know what that is, but I actually want to take a minute and just kind of double click on that. So these are, I'll give my explanation, then you correct me and say it better than me. Doug Lewin (28:25.624)And then I want to get into a little bit like what might be a better metric. So, salient safety, whatever its system average, but the D and the F are the important... Go ahead. What is it? Mary Cleary (28:37.556)It's System Average Interruption Duration Index. Doug Lewin (28:40.872)So Doug Lewin (28:41.122)duration and frequency, right? So how often are outages happening and how long do they last? But as you mentioned, a lot of times the extreme weather events are removed from that metric because it's sort of viewed as like force majeure. It's like, well, this is what are you going to do? Sometimes the power just goes out. But as you said earlier, customers are not cool with that. Like that's not okay. expect... Doug Lewin (29:07.362)to have the power back on. Have you seen any... I was on a panel at a conference a couple of months ago with a guy from Con Ed, the utility in New York, and he said they are actively trying to come up with different metrics because the old ones are so flawed. You work on this stuff around the world. Have you seen better ways to actually measure the outcomes we're after? Mary Cleary (29:28.782)don't think there's something perfect just yet. think the perfect metric will be something that is forward-looking, that's more of a leading indicator instead of a lagging indicator. And I think using predictive modeling technology puts utilities in a place where they can actually do that reliably and then communicate that to policymakers so that there's a sheer understanding. Doug Lewin (29:31.298)That's for sure. Doug Lewin (29:53.39)So basically, that's really interesting. So you could basically run a predictive model and say, hey, if a category three hurricane hit Corpus Christi, if a wildfire with wind speeds of 55 miles per hour hit Amarillo, God forbid any of these things happen. But you could, if a flood of Hurricane Harvey in 2017, we got a repeat of that and... Doug Lewin (30:20.238)2028, you could plug those into the model and you would say, based on existing systems and processes and infrastructure, we would expect power to be out this long. And then basically say, here's the triage list, utilities fix as much as you can, and the better you do against that benchmark, there could actually be a performance incentive potentially. Could be an increase in rate of return, could just be a cash payment, could be any number of different things. Doug Lewin (30:48.226)which I think the vast majority of customers would support because then you would actually have lower outage times, which is what everybody's after. Is that what you mean or do you mean something different? Mary Cleary (30:56.588)I think that's, I don't think that angle is out of the realm of possibility. Doug Lewin (31:01.91)Is there a different way that you're thinking of that though? how, what, because that's the way I understood it when you said it. Am I understanding it wrong? Mary Cleary (31:09.804)Yeah, no, maybe another a little bit more color I would add to it is I guess it avoids this really unsavory situation, right? Where the pendulum's going back and forth between reliability and resiliency and affordability. And you got something bad happens, no one likes the outages and the impacts of them, but then the shop wears off and people go, my gosh, all this stuff is really expensive. Do we really need all this? Is this necessary? Mary Cleary (31:36.064)And then you end up in a situation where you're deliberating until the cows come home about your torturing cost line items and then nothing happens. And then something bad happens again and people wonder why nothing's changed. So that's really the situation I'm referring to, which is like, let's stop having this high temperature back and forth between utilities and policymakers where policymakers sees a really big price tag and utilities see the Mary Cleary (32:04.674)since the thing that needs to get done. And they're not speaking the same language. Doug Lewin (32:11.564)I think some of the reason why that happens in my view is there's this sort of information asymmetry where the utilities know their system better than anybody else and the regulator doesn't have nearly as much information. But I'm not sure how we get over that problem. Have you guys ever worked for utility commissions or grid operators or is it like utility side? Mary Cleary (32:39.884)No, we're defying the utility sign, but we are seeing our technology being used as the vehicle to objectively communicate what's needed. And so when policymakers bristle at, you know, eight, nine, 10 figure investment, utility can then use the technology to say, okay, you don't like that. Well, here's what happens if we don't do that. You're probably not going to like that situation either, right? But then it becomes this way to evaluate how much risk you can buy down and at what cost by saying, Mary Cleary (33:09.742)Okay, maybe we haircut that investment by 30 % or 15 % or whatever. Can we look at the outcome, the proposed forecast outcome on the other side of that? And is that enough to justify the investment? Do we feel comfortable with that? And that kind of thing, that kind of dynamic really takes that temperature down when utilities and policymakers are trying to make those really difficult decisions together. Doug Lewin (33:30.446)Yeah. mean, you say eight, nine, 10 figures. And in Texas, for the resiliency plans the utilities are doing, I think we're bumping up against 11 figures at this point, because, yeah, Houston's is 5.7. Center points is 5.75 over three years proposed, not approved. Encore was a little over 3 billion over three years. I think, though, there is... I don't think anybody... I'm certainly not arguing, and I don't think anybody could... Doug Lewin (33:57.194)there doesn't need to be investment made in the distribution grid. That seems obvious and axiomatic. The question is how much and how do you balance that affordability? And I think so much of it is about getting better data out there and letting everybody see it. Like you said, here's the predictive modeling, here's what happens if this happens. Here are the targeted things that can be done and rank order and what they cost so that policymakers and regulators Doug Lewin (34:25.014)and utilities together, stakeholders, et cetera, consumer advocates can kind of make decisions together about, you know, this is you do Can you, you can definitely respond to that. I'm also just interested in like, how does all of this play into the affordability side of things? Does this give us, does it do what I just described? Are there other ways I'm not thinking of where we're using AI for utility modeling and that sort of thing could actually significantly save money, reduce the cost of investment? Mary Cleary (34:54.252)Yeah, so I think on the affordability piece, the primary role that AI can contribute to that is by helping size with the remediation solution is, right? So we're getting away from this, these pulls are weak in a category three, they're not going to make it. Let's just replace, let's panic and replace them all. Instead, let's add accessories like stays were appropriate and maybe even the ones that you need to replace. Maybe some of them can be one for one, wood to wood. Mary Cleary (35:21.506)And maybe there's only a handful of select hyper-targeted scenarios where you need something stronger like a steel or composite. Doug Lewin (35:29.664)And in the model, we'll get that granular to say in this spot because of maybe the geography, this one sits a little higher, it's a little more exposed to a coastal wind or whatever. This is the one that needs to be replaced as opposed to 50 of them. It'll get that granular. That's really interesting. All right. Good stuff. let's, course, it's the Energy Capital podcast. Let's talk about... Doug Lewin (35:58.67)policies. And again, and it actually may be before we jump to policy or maybe just as part of the same answer, I am curious just kind of where in the world you guys are working right now. We've talked about Centerpoint, you've mentioned Australia. Where else are you guys doing work around the world? Mary Cleary (36:15.82)Yeah, so we're working with utilities in pretty much every major region of the US right now. We're also in Europe. We have several customers across Europe, Asia, UK, South America increasingly. So I think we've got the continents covered except the Arctic. Doug Lewin (36:33.826)Yeah, no Antarctica yet, but know, they're in dream one day. So you see policy constructs all over the place. And this is one of the things I just think is not done nearly enough. know, Nehruq and other organizations, International Energy Agency, those kinds of organizations do a good job trying to like cross-pollinate, help people see the way, you know, folks do it differently around the world. But you guys get to see that. Doug Lewin (36:59.136)Are there any particular policy constructs that you think are particularly effective around reliability and resiliency? Mary Cleary (37:05.836)I don't think there's something yet that I would point to and say that's the thing that everybody should be doing that. I think, to come back to this idea of taking a more proactive approach, I think there are baby steps being taken around the world that kind of smell like that, but I don't think we're there yet. Doug Lewin (37:25.826)Yeah, I think that's right. I think this is, I always like to say, think, you know, there's a lot of innovation happening, obviously, on the tech side. There's a lot of innovation happening in the markets. Policy innovation is important too. You have to be able to like think differently because the regulatory constructs pretty much everybody's operating in were developed and evolved over a hundred years ago. And they've evolved some, of course, since, but like not a ton. Doug Lewin (37:55.566)It's an area that for the technology to actually have as much impact as it could, you're going to need the regulatory side to catch up, I think. Mary Cleary (38:05.888)Agree? Agree. Doug Lewin (38:07.566)But is there anything I should have asked you that I didn't? Anything else you want to cover? Mary Cleary (38:14.414)Let's see. Doug Lewin (38:16.782)There's so much, right? I mean, it's such a fascinating space, but. Mary Cleary (38:21.1)Absolutely. So Doug, think maybe there's one last thought I'll leave you with, which is that when we talk about the grid, we're often talking very big terms, right? We talk about massive amounts of money, we talk about sweeping projects and massive time scales and things taking a very long time. But something I am confident we're going to see more of and very excited about is this idea that we could see grid transformation happen on a more micro scale. Mary Cleary (38:50.306)with more micro outcomes. this idea that the energy transition and the idea of resiliency doesn't need to be this massive nail biter, right? Like everyone is on the edge of their seats every time there's a bad weather report. There's the Senate Bill 6 action earlier this week, so everyone's wondering what's gonna happen with large loads and such. And so I think technology like ours can play a really critical role Mary Cleary (39:20.062)and allowing utilities to take better, faster, more thoughtful, smaller steps, but in faster succession. So it keeps everyone on the same page and working towards the outcomes that we all want in a way that's much more affordable for consumers on the other end of the energy bill. Doug Lewin (39:37.144)So I was going to end, but now I want to ask about that. So we're going to go to another couple of minutes if that's okay. So Senate Bill 6, obviously I wrote about it a little bit and we'll put it in the show notes where I wrote about it and I'm sure I'll be writing about it a lot more in the coming months. And we're recording on February 14th, so the bill was just filed a few days ago. By the time you're listening to this, there could have been hearings or what have you. Doug Lewin (40:01.368)But it's a bill that really does kind of change some of the ways that large loads interconnect to the grid, change potentially some of the requirements for the generation they need to bring, and then change how they pay for transmission. I think, and Mary, I'll just say this the way I perceive it, and then you can change it, say it however you want. I think, I'm not sure if this is what you're getting at, but I think there's a little bit of sort of a freak out happening right now, frankly, where a lot of folks are like, my God, they're seeing the numbers of we might need 50, 60, 70 more gigawatts in the space of five, six, seven years, and that looks really scary. And I get it. We have added 13 gigawatts last year, an average of 11 gigawatts the last four years. Is what you're saying that these... And obviously, this is... Doug Lewin (40:55.246)but there's a whole lot of companies working in this space that AI actually, while it is itself a big load, actually, as we were talking about earlier, help solve some of the problems too. Almost itself be energy aware of when it's using energy, when it's using the energy that's on site. Maybe even helping to deploy distributed energy resources, help folks that have batteries, either in their garage on the wall or just in the car, like actually deploying assets and resources in a smarter way that makes us more reliable. And I didn't give my own definition earlier, Mary, but my own definition is reliability is do you have enough supply to meet demand? Resiliency is can you deal with extreme weather in a way where you stay online as long as possible and then you're back up that restoration is a very short period of time and distributed energy resources help with both of those things, right? Because they're adding supply and they're giving you resiliency because it's close to where you're at. So maybe I'm completely twisting around what you meant when you brought up Senate Bill 6, but that's where my head goes. What did you mean when you said that? Mary Cleary (42:06.092)Yeah, so for me, it was just yet another example of all the anxiety about energy. But I think you make an interesting point about how much is AI contributing to the anxiety and how much anxiety can it potentially detract from the equation. I don't know exactly what the answer is. I can't speak to a self-aware, energy-consuming AI anytime soon, although that'll be very exciting to see. But I do think there is massive opportunity for it to be a net anxiety relief. Doug Lewin (42:39.692)Yeah. And when you talk about the micro solutions, can you talk more about what you mean? Is that just like what you were saying earlier, like getting down to the individual poll? Or does that also deal with like micro generation? Does that come into the picture too? Mary Cleary (42:52.046)It's more thinking at the asset level, asset resiliency. Doug Lewin (42:56.814)Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, it makes a lot of sense. And I think it's really important for all these different things, whether it's distribution infrastructure, generating resources. We have to think of the micro and the macro together and how they fit together, because the really small things can actually add up to a whole lot. All right, cool. I'm going to ask the same question again. Is there anything else you'd like to say, because then I just added a whole lot to what you said at the end? Anything else you want to say before we end, Mary? Mary Cleary (43:20.866)No, I just had a question for you and it just went right under my head. No, you know what? It was actually about House Bill 2555 been out in the wild for some time now, but how is your level of optimism changed, if at all, since then? Doug Lewin (43:40.366)Well, honestly, this conversation actually has made me more optimistic about 2555. What I worry about 2555 is it's a little bit of a blank check. Now, I don't want to be Dougie down or just be negative here because I do think that that overall is a good policy. I think that you need utilities to spend money on the distribution grid and on resiliency, and it's a regulatory framework that gives them some certainty emboldens them a little bit to actually invest in the distribution grid, which as we all saw after Hurricane Barrel and other events, that wasn't the only one. Again, the Austin ice storm in February, 2023, there's all kinds of examples of where the distribution grid needs investment. My worry about it is there isn't enough data that folks can really look at and together and agree on. And I think that what y'all are doing, Doug Lewin (44:38.078)And on this podcast, I'll interview a lot of different companies going forward that do this, because I think the competition in this space is pretty interesting. And I think that there's going to be a lot of competition in this space. I think you guys are an early mover, and I've seen examples of your technology. I'm pretty excited about it. But to me, that is one of the most exciting things that the regulator, the utility, the stakeholders can all kind of see. No, here's the predictive modeling. Here's what happens if a cat three, cat four, cat five hits this particular area with the infrastructure you have in place. It ain't pretty and here's the rank order of what you could do to make the most impact at the lowest cost to reduce the damage and the potential pain and suffering that would happen after that. So I have no doubt that we need to spend on resiliency and I understand why lawmakers wanted to pass 2555. The information asymmetry and there's sort of the general lack of data that's been out there is one of my biggest concerns about that balance between reliability, resiliency, and affordability. I think what you guys are bringing to the table is potentially transformative. So I'm pretty excited about the technology. What do you think of 2555? Mary Cleary (45:52.846)You know, I am really excited, obviously, based off our work with utilities in Texas, what I'm seeing so far there. But I think it sets Texas very well apart from other states in this country, as well as other folks globally in a lot of ways. Because a lot of utilities, I won't name names, but they're still thinking about things through very narrow lenses, right? They've got their pet problem and Texas is a bit unique, right, because it experiences a whole laundry list of things, whereas other areas of the world maybe experience two or three of them. But I think... Doug Lewin (46:30.811)We've got it all here in Texas. You name your climate risk. It's right here. Mary Cleary (46:36.226)But just zooming out and thinking about everything through that resiliency lens, think that's a really good example that others would move themselves to follow. Doug Lewin (46:45.548)Yeah, yeah. I it makes a lot of sense. Yeah, I just think the layer that hasn't been there yet is the regulators really insisting on seeing the data and not saying that they haven't done it yet. It's just like we haven't had these tools. Right? So again and the data wasn't necessarily available, you know? Exactly. I get my pen and paper and I scribble something down for you and it's like, as a regulator, are you going to put much stock in that or do you want to audit something and not take my word for it? Doug Lewin (47:19.886)Yeah, again, regulatory innovation, right? think regulators really insisting on we need the best possible data. They have a huge job. It's damn near an impossible job. I don't envy them for having that responsibility, but they've got to make sure they're looking out after ratepayers and making sure that, we always say keep the lights on. No, it's like making sure the heat and the air conditioning are on. That's so people can find a flashlight. It's the heat and the air conditioning. Keep that running. Mostly air conditioning in Texas, though. Anyway. Mary, I really appreciate you taking the time. I'm excited about Nira. I am excited about everything I've heard so far. I'm looking forward to following the growth and evolution of this company and all of these kinds of use cases to hopefully improve outcomes for customers. And yeah, thanks for taking the time. Mary Cleary (48:15.438)Pleasure speaking with you, Doug. Thanks so much for having me. Take care. Doug Lewin (48:18.04)Thanks, Mary. Thank you for listening to the Energy Capital Podcast. I hope you enjoyed the episode. If you did, please like, rate and review wherever you listen to your podcasts. Until next time, have a great day. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.douglewin.com/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.douglewin.comNote: We had some minor audio issues in this episode—thanks for bearing with us. The conversation is still clear and well worth the listen. Appreciate your patience!John Arnold is one of the most successful energy traders of all time. He built his career by understanding how systems work, where inefficiencies exist, and how markets respond. Today, as a …

Solar energy has the potential to revolutionize Texas’ power grid, lower costs, and provide resilience in extreme weather. But what happens when some companies selling solar systems aren’t playing fair? In this episode of the Energy Capital Podcast, I spoke with Sara DiNatale, an investigative reporter whose in-depth four-part series “In Broad Daylight” for the San Antonio Express-News uncovered disturbing scams from unethical and predatory companies. DiNatale was honored for her work on this series as one of only 15 out of 500 entries to win the George Polk Award for “intrepid, bold and influential” reporting.The series started with a few homeowners’ struggles but quickly exposed a larger pattern — solar systems that weren’t properly installed, homeowners left with massive loan payments for panels that didn’t work, and a lack of consumer protections to hold bad actors accountable. DiNatale detailed how some homeowners were aggressively targeted by door-to-door salespeople, pressured into signing contracts that promised energy savings but often resulted in tens of thousands of dollars in debt for non-working systems.In Austin and San Antonio alone, 18% to 24% of solar installations failed their first inspection, meaning homeowners were left with what one expert called “expensive roof decorations.” Some systems continued to fail on second and third inspections, leaving families with long-term loans for technology that wasn’t even functional.One of the most heartbreaking cases she covered was the Duncan family in Corpus Christi, a low-income, hearing-impaired couple sold a $100,000 system they never should have been sold. Their credit was destroyed and the installer vanished.We also explored how some solar companies operate like multi-level marketing (MLM) schemes, recruiting young salespeople with promises of making six figures, teaching them to target elderly homeowners, and encouraging deceptive sales tactics. Some of these companies even offer cash incentives upfront to make the deal seem more appealing, without disclosing that this money is really just wrapped into the loan.The good news? There are many great solar companies and ethical solar installers in Texas, and there are steps consumers can take to protect themselves. We talked about what consumers should look for. We also discussed legislative fixes, including a requirement that no company gets paid until an installation passes inspection, licensing standards for solar installers, and consumer protection laws to crack down on deceptive financing practices. A bill was filed by Senator Zaffirini at the Texas Legislature (SB 1036) to address many of the problems mentioned by DiNatale.Solar remains one of the most promising energy solutions for Texas, but without proper oversight, these scams could continue to spread — especially as the demand for distributed energy grows.This is an episode you don’t want to miss. If you or someone you know is considering solar, listen before you shop, much less sign any contracts.As always, please like, share, and leave a five-star review wherever you listen to podcasts. Thank you for being a part of this conversation!Time Stamps00:00 - Introduction to the Energy Capital Podcast05:14 - The Importance of Inspections and Approvals07:49 - Real Stories of Victims in the Solar Industry10:26 - Legislative Solutions and Consumer Awareness12:44 - Sales Tactics and Red Flags in Solar Companies18:09 - The Solar Sales Landscape21:47 - Understanding Financing and Dealer Fees29:43 - Consumer Complaints and Industry Accountability30:09 - Positive Actors in the Solar Industry35:09 - Advice for Potential Solar Buyers37:20 - Financial Considerations for Solar Energy Investment38:53 - The Importance of Battery Storage in Solar Systems39:47 - Challenges in the Solar Industry: Trust and Education42:10 - Consumer Protection in the Growing Solar Market44:01 - Regulatory Measures and Licensing in the Solar Industry46:48 - Tracking and Accountability for Solar Sales Practices49:31 - The Need for Consumer Guides and Resources51:52 - Engaging with the Solar Community and ResourcesShow NotesConsumer Protection and Solar Industry Scams* Sara DiNatale’s Four-Part Solar Investigation (San Antonio Express-News) – The full investigative series exposing deceptive solar sales tactics in Texas.* Sara on X (Twitter) * Texas Attorney General’s Consumer Complaints Division – Where Texas residents can report fraudulent solar companies.* US Department of the Treasury Solar Scams Resource – Guides on avoiding deceptive home energy sales tactics.* FTC Consumer Solar Awareness Articles - 1 & 2Grid Reliability and Interconnection Failures* Austin Energy Solar Program –* CPS Energy Solar Information * ERCOT Interconnection Process – How solar systems connect to the grid and what happens when they fail inspections.High-Pressure Sales Tactics and Deceptive Financing* Better Business Bureau (BBB) Solar Complaints – Reports on misleading solar sales practices in Texas.* Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) Consumer Guide – What homeowners should look for when considering solar.* NABCEP Solar Installer Certification – How to verify if a solar installer is certified.Legislative Fixes and Future Protections* Senate Bill 1036 - 89th session bill relating to the regulation of residential solar retail transactions. * Texas Legislature Bill Tracker – The Legislature’s site for monitoring bills and hearings.* Nevada’s Solar Consumer Protection Program – A model Texas could adopt for preventing predatory sales.* California Solar Licensing Requirements – A look at other states’ approaches to regulating solar contractors.Key Quotes from the Episode* "We found Texans paying for solar panels that don’t even work, systems that failed inspections multiple times, leaving homeowners with nothing but massive loan payments." – Sara DiNatale* "In Texas, you don’t need a license to install solar panels, which means the person drilling holes in your roof might have zero experience." – Sara DiNatale* "This is a problem that needs urgent legislative fixes, requiring an inspection before payment is one simple way to protect homeowners." – Doug Lewin This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.douglewin.com/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.douglewin.comIn this episode of the Energy Capital Podcast, I had the pleasure of talking with Jimmy Glotfelty, commissioner at the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) from the summer of 2021 through the end of 2024. With decades of experience across the private and public sectors, Jimmy is the rare person who brings both a developer and a regulator’s perspecti…

In this episode of the Energy Capital Podcast, I spoke with Congressman Greg Casar about some of the most pressing challenges and opportunities facing Texas’ energy system. From addressing worker protections during extreme weather to rethinking Texas’ grid structure, our conversation explored a range of ideas championed by the Congressman, including* The Connect the Grid Act: Casar introduced the bill on the three year anniversary of Winter Storm Uri. The bill aims to improve grid reliability by interconnecting ERCOT with the national grid. We explored the positives and negatives of that proposal, including a recent MIT study that found the bill would reduce outages by 40-80% in a system similar to Winter Storm Uri, assuming comparable power plant failures— depending on how many transmission lines are built to interconnect ERCOT. Casar also highlighted the economic benefits, including new revenue opportunities for Texas through clean energy exports. And I asked him about the potential downsides including a lot more regulations before Texas builds more infrastructure. * Balancing permitting reform with consumer protection: While Casar supports streamlined permitting to speed up transmission and clean energy projects, he also emphasized the importance of keeping key consumer protections in place. * Protecting workers in extreme heat: With heat the leading cause of climate-related deaths, Casar discussed the need for federal heat safety standards to protect outdoor workers, including those in construction and delivery services. He pointed to recent preventable deaths as evidence of why this issue demands immediate attention.* Opportunities for workers in the energy transition: Casar also focused on the challenges facing oil and gas workers during the energy transition. Through his American Energy Worker Opportunity Act, he hopes to provide a clear path for fossil fuel workers to transition into high-paying clean energy jobs without sacrificing pay or benefits. This approach prioritizes stability for workers while supporting long-term economic growth. We talked about how, even though Texas is producing more oil and gas than ever before, there are 100,000 fewer oil and gas workers in Texas today than in 2014. This episode and the many I’ve recorded with Republicans, including the one last month with Governor Rick Perry, isn’t about picking sides — it’s about being more curious than judgemental. I hope you’ll listen regardless of your political leanings, and I hope you’ll find this discussion as interesting and thought-provoking as I did.As always, please like, share, and leave a five-star review wherever you listen to podcasts. Thank you for your support!This is a free episode, but many of the episodes, as well as the archives, Grid Roundups, and more are for paid subscribers. Please become one today!The Texas Energy and Power Newsletter is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Timestamps: 00:00 - Introduction to Congressman Greg Casar06:29 - The Climate Crisis: A Personal and Political Perspective12:51 - The Connect the Grid Act: Addressing Energy Reliability19:28 - Interconnections and the Future of Texas Energy25:37 - Bipartisan Opportunities in the Energy Economy33:50 - Worker Protections in a Changing Climate39:11 - Transitioning Fossil Fuel Workers to Clean Energy JobsShownotes: Grid Interconnections and Reliability* The Connect the Grid Act – Congressman Casar’s proposal to interconnect ERCOT with the national grid, reducing outages and enabling clean energy exports.* MIT Study on Grid Interconnections – Research demonstrating how linking Texas to neighboring grids could have prevented up to 80% of power outages during Winter Storm Uri.* Southern Spirit Transmission Project (Pattern Energy) – Transmission line connecting Texas to the Eastern Interconnect.* Grid United El Paso Project – Connecting ERCOT to the Western Interconnect to expand energy sharing and improve grid flexibility.* The Southern Spirit transmission line could connect Texas grid to the southeast. Will it ever happen?Clean Energy Investments and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA)* Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) Overview – The largest federal clean energy investment package in U.S. history.* 45X Advanced Manufacturing Tax Credit – Providing incentives for clean energy manufacturing, including solar panels, wind turbines, and batteries.* Clean Energy Investments Dashboard (E2) – Tracks jobs and investments related to clean energy projects spurred by the IRA.* Texas Enterprise Fund – State program that Casar highlighted as a model for attracting clean energy manufacturing.* DOE Loan Programs Office – Supporting financing for large-scale clean energy and grid-related projects.Worker Protections and Climate Safety* American Energy Worker Opportunity Act – Casar’s initiative to transition fossil fuel workers into union-backed clean energy jobs.* Federal Heat Safety Standards – Proposed by the Biden administration to protect workers from extreme heat exposure.* Workers Defense Project – Advocating for better working conditions and stronger labor protections for Texas construction and energy workers.* Texas Observer Article: Heat Deaths and Worker Protections – Coverage of heat-related worker deaths and the ongoing push for heat safety regulations.Energy Transition and Technology* Texas Geothermal Energy Alliance – Mentioned as a potential growth area for transitioning oil and gas workers due to transferable skills.* NuScale Power – Casar briefly mentions nuclear energy, including advanced technologies like Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), as part of the future energy mix.* Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy – Supporting nuclear innovation and new projects.* U.S. Climate Alliance – Texas is not currently a member, but Casar highlighted federal initiatives for state collaboration on climate resilience.Key Quotes:* “We’re no longer talking about preserving the planet for future generations—we’re talking about saving lives and livelihoods today.” – Greg Casar* “The Connect the Grid Act isn’t about taking control away from Texas. It’s about making sure the lights stay on and Texans don’t suffer through another Winter Storm Uri.” – Greg Casar* “We need to support oil and gas workers as they transition into new roles. They powered this country for decades, and they deserve stability and good jobs in the clean energy economy.” – Greg Casar* "We’re not asking Texas to give up its independence. What we’re asking for is smart interconnections that allow us to export clean energy and prevent major grid failures." – Greg Casar* "The Inflation Reduction Act isn’t just about solar panels—it’s about creating stable, well-paying jobs in manufacturing, geothermal, and other industries that can benefit everyone, including oil and gas workers." – Greg CasarTranscriptDoug LewinCongressman Greg Casar, welcome to the Energy Capital Podcast. Congressman Greg Casar Thanks so much for having me. Doug LewinSo you obviously made a big splash when you introduced the Connect the Grid Act just about a year ago on the anniversary of Winter Storm Uri. And I do want to talk to you about that. But before we go there, I'd like to just get a sense of your vision for energy, dealing with climate change, anything related to those issues, both as an individual, but also obviously as the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Doug LewinWe're recording nine days into the Trump administration. It's a really fascinating time to be chair of the progressive caucus. So just want to get a sense of, of, your vision and the caucus's vision, for energy and for climate action. Congressman Greg Casar Well, tragically, climate issues are now front and center in our daily lives. We're no longer talking, as we may have a decade or two ago, about preserving our planet for our grandchildren. We're talking about helping protect your life today. We're no longer talking about how this may cost us money in the future if we don't invest in clean energy. You're fueling the climate crisis in your mailbox right now as home insurance rates shoot up. If you're in places like Florida and increasingly in Texas, there's entire home insurers ditching the state. so even though I'm a relatively young elected official, I remember when I was first campaigning for office 10 years ago, we were talking about the looming climate crisis or the threat of climate change. But now I think progressives are pivoting. To make this no longer just a progressive theoretical issue in the future, but instead a bread and butter daily issue for voters right now. I wish we weren't in that place where the climate crisis was already hitting us so hard, but now that it is, we should be talking about this as an issue that affects voters of all political stripes and all political backgrounds. Because when I knock on a door now, people do talk about Winter Storm Uri and how that hurt them and their families. They recognize that the cost of rebuilding Los Angeles after these wildfires could wind up, I think, being greater than the entire cost of the entire Inflation Reduction Act, the biggest climate investment in our nation's history. So that's where I think things stand right now, is that this is a bread and butter issue for working people. We've got to make this, we've got to take on energy issues, both for our safety and for just not just our prosperity, just to make sure that things don't end up costing a huge amount. Doug Lewin Yeah, absolutely. You know, it definitely seems like with each passing year, as these various climate fueled events continue to add up, it seems like we would pass some kind of a tipping point where things would really change. And yet it doesn't. I you talk about 10 years ago, I remember 20 years ago with Hurricane Katrina and thinking, this will definitely be a point where things will change and it doesn't necessarily change. Let's get into a little bit more of, where you think change should happen. you introduced, as I just mentioned, the Connect the Grid Act. Can you describe for the listeners what that would do and why you think it's so important? Congressman Greg Casar Winter Storm Uri, I think, changed everything as it relates to energy and the grid here in Texas because it just hit everyone so hard, except critically. Almost all of us here in Texas have family or friends or people we know in places like El Paso or places like Beaumont that are on the edges of the state that were interconnected to other parts of the country. And so I was in touch with my family and friends and places all over Texas to check in on them and we clearly saw that those who are interconnected to other parts of the state did not have the huge, massive power outages demanded by ERCOT that the rest of us did. And suddenly, people like governor Abbott going and blaming wind power or whatever, just felt that those excuses suddenly fell completely flat. Before the idea of Texas's independence from the rest of the country maybe sounded cool, but it didn't serve us well in our immediate needs. And so when I got to Congress, I thought I would co-sign onto whichever bill there was that said that Texas's grid should be internet connected to the national grid. And I found no such bill. In fact, all of the big grid legislation championed by both sides of the aisle, all of the transmission legislation basically always had an exception for Texas, always said, all of the supplies everywhere except for ERCOT. Everybody just decided to leave a big Texas-sized hole, donut hole, in the middle of the country. And that's just not going to work. I mean, if we're supposed to be the energy capital of the country, how is it, one, that the lights can go off and people keep on tracking to see if the lights will go off? And two, how are we going to serve this entire country's electric needs as our needs for electricity continues to grow if we think about transmission, just cut Texas out as a Texas-shaped hole every time. So we filed the Connect the Grid Act because the federal government does guarantee electric reliability basically as a right in this country. And what we don't do is say that there needs to be a certain amount of transmission connectivity in order to achieve that goal. But in Texas, I believe that because of the lack of interconnectivity, we aren't achieving the level of reliability guaranteed in the United States. And therefore, we want to set a reliability standard and require a certain amount of transmission to be able to go in and out of the state in a certain level of connectivity. so that if the Great Act passed, essentially that would require this level of connection to start being built out between Texas and its neighboring National Grids. Doug Lewin So I want to talk about both the positives and the negatives of that, the upsides and the downsides and get your thoughts. So on the upside, on the positive side, there was a study that MIT put out over the summer, and we will link to that in the show notes, that showed that if we... Congressman Greg Casar I've never gotten a call from MIT saying, hey, we're going to study your bill and see if it does what it says it's going to do. We all crossed our fingers. like, well, we sure hope this works. Doug Lewin If they came back and said, sorry, Congressman, your bill is crap. It would have been a bad day, but they did not do that. They actually said what they did was really interesting. They took a thousand different simulations of a Winter Storm Uri type of event. just to get this out of the way, because I hear this all the time, people are like, oh, that could never happen again. It could happen again. It happened in the 1980s. It was 1989. There was a very similar system. it was not a one in a million. It's actually two within 40 years. There's nothing to think we couldn't get another one. it might nothing to think it might not even be worse. But they took a Winter Storm Uri situation modeled the same number of outages that we had during Uri like 50 % of the natural gas plants are offline, 40 % of wind, 43 % of coal, etc. And then looked at if there were interconnections as laid out in the Connect the Grid Act, and you have a range in the bill. And so they said the range of reductions and outages would be between 40 and 80%. It might've been like 43 and 79 or something like that. But basically between 40 and 80 % less outages. One thing I don't think they actually got into in that study was what's called Black Start, had we lost the whole grid. We would have actually been able to get back up quicker if we had more interconnections. It's harder to bring the grid back up if you're only sort of, indeed, indeed. But if you did, if you ended up in that situation, more interconnections would make it easier. So those are two of the big upsides. Do you want to say any more about those or add any other positives that you see if we went down that road? Congressman Greg Casar Sure would be great good to just not lose the whole grid. You one, you would, of course, save a bunch of money if you don't have the mass outages. mean, there was there's calculations that you had over $100 billion in damages, economic damage, just from the ERCOT outages we had during Winter Storm Uri alone. So there's a real economic savings in the disaster moments. But what isn't talked about as much is also the economic output for the state of Texas when other people are in disaster moments. Because part of the idea of the United States of America is that people help us out when we're in trouble and we help other people out when they're in trouble. And Texas, of course, has a lot of land available for energy development. And there are plenty of states around us that if they have a giant storm cloud on over them or they have a massive economic development project they want to engage in. Rhat we might be able to export and sell energy from Texas. And the MIT study shows that there would be likely over $100 million in revenue yearly back into ERCOT to be able to lower our own energy prices or be able to strengthen our own grid. Because sometimes, or oftentimes, the sun is shining and the wind is blowing and workers are at work in Texas, and there might be trouble in Oklahoma or in New Mexico or in Louisiana. Doug Lewin Yeah, or even more to the point, like on the East Coast or the West Coast, right? Because there's the saying, the wind is always blowing, the sun's always shining somewhere, right? So if you have the more interconnections you have, the more ability you have to move that power. Congressman Greg Casar And of course, we want to address the increased energy need across the country as we electrify things more and more, not just for climate reasons, but also because we know that it's more effective and cheaper, then it's better for the whole country. Now, I know we're primarily talking to a Texas audience here, but part of how we get the U.S. Congress on board is that it's much better for the entire country for us to be able to move electricity all across the country. As our electricity demand continues to increase, an increased electrical production, increased electrical use and transmission makes us competitive around the world. Doug LewinYeah. And it is kind of weird when you think about it, just in the sense that we're, you know, Texas has been an energy exporting state forever, but that's not forever for a hundred years, right? But that's plus spindle top, right? 120 years. So, but that's oil and gas. And for some reason we, we don't export, energy to power, I should say. Yeah. Congressman Greg Casar Yeah, that's weird, Doug. Everybody feels like we want to set up export terminals for liquid natural gas but don't want to electric molecules from and sell them between here and Louisiana. Doug Lewin So I do want to get your thoughts about this though, because I think there is a potential sort of like a different path, which would be additional interconnections between ERCOT and the East and the West without a full interconnection, which still would achieve that aim. So there's a couple of projects. I'm not sure if you're familiar with them, but one is by Pattern Energy. call it Southern Spirit, I think is what it's called. It's like from. West Texas, Houston Chronicle had a great series on this. We'll put a, we'll put a link to that in the show notes too. From West Texas into the Eastern interconnect. Uh, there's a project that, uh, grid United, Michael Skelly and his group, uh, are working on that would connect. Um, it's actually within the state. It's kind of a really interesting one, but it's from within ERCOT into El Paso, but thus would connect to the Western interconnect. And with those, you could export the power. Then if there's an emergency, you turn around the flow and bring power in. But you wouldn't have the full interconnection, which then would have Texas under FERC jurisdiction, which like heading into a, you know, four years or just the very beginning of four years of the Trump administration, like I would think, you know, that you might see that there's be some benefit of not having Texas under FERC jurisdiction. ERCOT has this slide they put out all the time that shows if you have to go through the FERC process to build transmission takes 10 to 12 years in Texas, we can usually get it done in five to six. So there are advantages to not being interconnected. And I'm just wondering if you've thought about maybe like this different path of having these additional interconnections without the full interconnection. Congressman Greg Casar Look, I'm a supporter of the Southern Spirit line, a supporter of interconnections between the state. You know, even if you had Southern Spirit at its at sort of its largest end of transmission, you would need multiple times that if you really wanted to deal with the problem. And I'd say go ahead and build multiple times of those. I think one of the challenges that you see and you can it's not hard to read between the lines on this, even if you're not fully plugged in and just reading the media reports on it is that they're having to continue to maneuver to make these connections smaller or kind of more smart and interesting like you just described within the states, but going into El Paso in order to try to avoid the question of, well, how do we deal with federal regulation? And some of those federal regulations, I'd be fine with figuring out how to streamline them and accelerate things. Some of them are there to protect the consumer. And I'm always skeptical of maligning the entire process when sometimes some of it's really there to take care of you and me against somebody that wants to take advantage of us and make a bunch of money on it. And so I do think that there is a real benefit of those interconnections. But I also believe that if we just. Bit the bullet and just said, look, we're part of the United States of America. We should stop trying to use all of these loopholes to not be a part of the United States of America. Once we get over and just figure out what parts of the FERC process we want to improve, I think a ton of these interconnections would quickly get built because the market demand is there. I don't think anybody thinks that it's in our economic interest or safety interest not to have these interconnections and everybody just keeps dancing around the FERC question. So I'm fine for people to keep dancing the best they can and build out those interconnections. But I think that we get there way quicker and way faster if we just do the right thing rather than continue to dance around it because we don't want something to maybe cost us a couple of years here or there, but it ends up costing us 20 years of dancing. I that makes sense. some of the things that slow down transmission projects and generation projects in other states don't apply in Texas. And that has to do partly with how we've structured our grid, which we would still have a lot of say over even under FERC. Also Some of those studies that I've looked at don't always take into account how other states deal with zoning and planning and permitting on their own. So I wouldn't lay, of course, I don't have the slideshow in front of me that you're talking about, but just in general, when somebody says to me, hey, if suddenly we're under FERC, Texas is going to go from six years to 12 years on transmission. I take that with a full salt shaker of salt. And, you know, as a former city council member that has been a big advocate for a lot more housing supply and on the board of Austin Energy or Public Electric Utility here being a big advocate of a lot more energy supply, I am deeply sympathetic to people that say there's stuff in permitting processes that we don't need to have and also deeply knowledgeable about there being corporate shills that want to say something is wrong with the permitting process. That's actually the main thing we want in our permitting process. We want plants to be safe. We want transmission lines to work and be smart and not be duplicative. But then we also need to make sure we plow through sort of NIMBYISM and concern trolling and needless red tape. Both of those can exist. And I think that you know, this old way of thinking of you're either team more permitting or team less permitting is just, you know, not the right way of thinking about it when you're talking about energy, just like when you're talking about housing. Doug Lewin Yeah, totally. And this is actually one of the things I most love about doing this podcast is to be able to go kind of a few levels deeper than just what kind of appears on the surface and really kind of understand where people are coming from. Because, yeah, I mean, I think a lot of people would assume different things about different members of Congress based on what letters after their name on what they would think of permitting reform. it's the truth is actually much more complicated. Speaking of areas where there might be things that are not intuitive based on the letter after somebody's name. I do want to talk to you about these early days of the Trump administration and particularly where the Inflation Reduction Act is headed, what is kind of the future of some of the spending. We're recording on January 29th. Just yesterday the administration gave a directive and Congressman Greg Casar You're recording in the post-constitutional world, Doug LewinWell, we'll, we'll see. We'll see where this goes in the courts. Yeah. It's a pretty wild thing, right? For the executive branch to say an act of Congress, and the previous administration with contracts signed that those contracts wouldn't be honored, which is what it looks like they're saying. We'll see how all this shakes out. what, what I want to, I, I'd be interested in your thoughts on that for sure. I also though want to kind of, I want to understand, I mean, you've been in Congress for a while. You've worked there for a while. You've seen kind of where different members come out on this stuff. I'm really interested in the areas of the Inflation Reduction Act, for instance, like 45X, which is the provision that is for manufacturing incentives. And we're seeing a lot of manufacturing come into states like Georgia and South Carolina and Tennessee and Texas. And I think if the administration just halts all of that funding as it appears they want to do and all of those tax credits, there's probably going to be a lot of Republican members of Congress and Republican governors that are pretty upset at that. Where do you think there might actually be bipartisan areas to kind of work together on the energy economy, the clean energy economy, however you want to talk about it over these next four years? Congressman Greg Casar I do want folks to have this in context of where we are right now. It was just yesterday that it became clear the Trump administration froze or said they were going to freeze basically all federal funds that flowed through states and municipalities and grants, which everybody rightfully freaked out about. I mean, there are nine states that receive over 45 % of their overall state budget in the form of federal funding and federal grants, all nine of them. In fact, being Republican controlled states from Wyoming to South Dakota to most prominently Louisiana, where the Speaker of the House and the House Majority Leader are both from. Medicaid portals got shut down because so much of Medicaid is administered through the state. And then the Trump administration said, sorry, that was a glitch, website glitch. They're back on. You know, a court then quickly halted the order based on multiple Supreme Court precedents that have existed, including a unanimous one. And so that's where we are. What I hope and expect, but don't know, you if somebody's listening to this podcast a month or two from now, what will happen. I hope and expect that we are not really in a post-constitutional order, like I joked about here earlier, and that courts make it very clear. That when Congress has passed a law and appropriated dollars, that those dollars are then sent out. Because if we wind up, I do want to spend more of my time assuming that that is what happens, but if we wind up in a world where that isn't held up, will become a whole new world about how budgets and laws are passed in the United States of America. Because how could you have a bipartisan law where I say, okay, I'm happy to fund this program and this Republican state, but we do need money for these hungry children in this democratic city or what have you, or we need disaster funds. We're going to vote for this bill that I may not love, but it has funding to rebuild North Carolina and California. And then what happens if President Trump just gets to say, well, I just not going to rebuild California, even though that got passed into law. I mean, how could Congress operate? How can a budget ever get passed? How can we do almost anything if the president can just say take back seas. I it's just totally nuts. And so my hope is we don't wind up in that world because if you wind up in that world, I just don't know how to tell what nobody will be able to tell you how this is going to work anymore. Doug LewinI mean, at some point the Supreme Court's gonna have to make that decision, right? I mean, at some point this has got to be headed to the Supreme Court and they're either gonna weigh in or not weigh in, but by not weighing in, they will have affirmed the lower court. At some point the Supreme Court's gonna have to say whether or not a president just has absolute power to void contracts. I mean, this is like, yeah. Congressman Greg Casar And the point being is the Supreme Court has already weighed on this multiple times on the side of if Congress puts something into the law, the president's got to follow it. The question is, this Supreme Court that was packed by Donald Trump and that he's testing out deliberately right now, will they hold that up? I think I expect that they will, but we will see. In the world that they do uphold that precedent, Doug LewinExactly. Congressman Greg Casar and when we pass something into law, actually has to move forward. Then there are real opportunities, there are going to be some opportunities, many opportunities to save the Inflation Reduction Act from being slashed. Because as you pointed out, some of the biggest recipients of the kinds of Inflation Reduction Act investments to bring manufacturing back to the United States. Are places like Marjorie Taylor Greene's own district. These are communities that need these jobs the most are seeing a resurgence of American production and manufacturing, and we need that so badly. And so the house has extremely slim margins. Once Trump finishes appointing some house members to his cabinet, then you could have many cases where it's just a one vote margin in the House to get anything passed. So any Republican who could potentially lose significant investments in their district can essentially veto a bill. So you have some members that, you I think at the core of the Trump agenda, in my view, is to pass continued corporate tax breaks and billionaire tax cuts to essentially repay the major industries and the big billionaires that not only bankroll Trump in the Republican Party, but that also are just Trump's buddies at this point. You know, when you see the front row of inauguration being these billionaire buddies of Trump's, I think that's really at the core of the agenda. But there are then these warring factions within the National Republican Party that want to, you know, continue to shrink government to strangle it and drown it in a bathtub and won't want those levels of billionaire tax cuts without cutting programs and Medicare and Social Security are extremely popular programs. They're the one of the biggest parts of our budget, the military. They don't want to cut even though there are certainly some war contractors that are profiteers that we could potentially try to take a look at. But I doubt that they'll actually go there because there are again members that are so tied in with those private defense industries that that may not get cut. And so now they're trying to go after what they see as quote unquote sort of woke and Green New Deal policies, which is really a very, you know, what they might call that would be a tiny sliver of the budget. And once you look at the major investments in what they might call, quote unquote, the Green New Deal or whatever it is they want to call it, you look at it, it's, you know, investments in making sure that there's a battery manufacturing plant in a part of the country that has lost industrial jobs and wants to regain those industrial jobs. So it really puts them in a rock and a hard place. And I think in the positive aspect of this is that between that rock and a hard place, maybe we actually get past the name calling and the labeling of stuff and people start saying, hey, you know what? This is just a good idea. Even though Joe Biden signed it into law, building our capacity for manufacturing solar panels, building our capacity for manufacturing batteries, researching the energy technologies of the future is a good idea, whether it's because you want to stay competitive with China, whether you want to bring back manufacturing jobs to the United States, whether you just want to be a politician that makes sure unemployment goes down in your community. Maybe regardless of the letter next to your name, this is a good thing. I hope that's where we wind up. It hasn't been my experience this last term in Congress, but I'm hoping to make it our experience because it's where we need to get to is just get some of these things off of the partisan chopping block and make sure that if it's just good for the country, that it should just be good. Doug Lewin Yeah, mean, bizarrely, ironically, whatever, we're in a place now where if you were to design like Tabula Rasa, a, you know, American energy dominance, America first energy agenda, like a lot of it would be the stuff that's in the IRA, like manufacture it here, compete against the Chinese, don't let the Chinese, you know, government and industry control clean energy over the next decades. yeah, mean, hope springs eternal. hear you that the experience doesn't always like match up with what you think might make sense, but there's at least an opportunity maybe I think for some the, for some bipartisan work to happen over the next few years. Hope Springs eternal. I do want to ask you before we run out of time about the American Energy Worker Opportunity Act and your work related to the, some of the federal heat rules. I mean, this is, this seems to me like one of the biggest issues that just doesn't get talked about that much. mean, look, I, and, and I hope people from all parts of the ideological spectrum listen to this. I interview Republicans and Democrats both for this pod. And I hope people listen to folks of the other letter behind their name, but whatever like letter you associate with, whatever party associated with, even whatever you believe about climate change and what is causing it, what is just a simple empirical matter is the temperatures are higher in the summertime. I don't think there's really any debate about what's causing that, but even if I were to grant that, like, you could debate what's causing that, what you can't debate is that 2011 was the hottest summer Texas ever had recorded. 2023 was the second hottest 2024. Seemed very cool if you lived in Texas because 2023 had just happened, but was actually the sixth hottest summer. Basically the average of any last 10 years is the hottest average last 10 years period. And so when you talk about a state where you have a lot of construction workers working outside during summer times where it's a hundred degrees every day and there are not required breaks, that's a big deal. I know you're background, having worked for Workers Defense Project, this issue is near and dear to your heart. I'm not going to ask you a specific question. I just want you to speak to the importance of having protections for workers in the heat and what you think those policies should look like, maybe what's in the American Energy Worker, or the American Energy Worker Opportunity Act, has more to do with oil and gas worker transition, but the federal heat rules, climate change mitigation, talk about any and all of that that you'd like to in the time we have left. Congressman Greg Casar On top of the key consumer issues around making sure you have power when it's hot or when it's cold, we also know that climate affects us with what we're doing most of our days, which is at work. And it is getting hotter and hotter. Heat is actually the biggest climate killer we've got, more than killing us in hurricanes or tornadoes or in floods people die because it's just so hot. And especially if they're working really difficult outdoor jobs, or even if they're in some of these warehouse jobs or work in the baggage belt at the airport where it gets really hot. And if workers aren't prepared or aren't able to take a break, then people get sick. that obviously hurts us economically. And it also obviously hurts our families. So needlessly. When people say, know, like, well, shouldn't employers already give workers a break? I've heard from far too many instances where that doesn't happen. On a construction job, when somebody's trying to hit a deadline before the next construction crew comes in, hey, we've got electrical coming in tomorrow. We need to wrap this up. Don't come off the scaffold for the next six hours. And somebody runs out of water in their water bottle. That's when somebody gets a stroke and dies. A postal worker here in Dallas just recently died getting pushed to wrap up his route. He'd been working for the postal service for decades. They're in these trucks without air conditioning. They're walking from door to door and that over 100 degree heat, dedicated public servants, church going member guy that everybody knew and loved in the community. know, Mr. Gates dropped down and died a federal employee. And so the Biden administration, totally preventable, the Biden administration put forward a proposed rule after lots of scientific study and support across a lot of business industries to say, look, when the temperature gets above 90 degrees, then people deserve a quick little break every couple of hours. And this is going to prevent deaths. And this kind of rule has been killed by oftentimes big industry lobbies, especially in big ag and in construction. But I pushed our own postal service, Postmaster General DeJoy recently, to implement this rule himself. This rule would have applied to him as well. And they said no. And so there's this resistance at the industry level that says, OK, we've got this handled. But clearly, it isn't actually being handled. And so here in the United States of America, we're hoping to finally win this basic right for workers. The rule has been proposed. And it could be finalized if the Trump administration chooses to finally put it into effect. The Biden administration has gone through all these hoops that were put in place essentially by Newt Gingrich back in the day to make it, know, he had to go through all these hoops to propose the rule, get it written up, get it vetted, and it just has to go into effect. And we'd love for it to go into effect in time for this summer and ready to work with anybody, with any letter behind their name to try to get that done. The American Energy Worker Opportunity Act, as you've noted, is a different topic. I led that bill, bicameral bill, between the House and the Senate. Senator Sherrod Brown carried that bill in the Senate and he tragically lost his race here in Ohio recently. But the vision behind that is that too often, talking about a just transition, workers on the ground, especially in places like the Gulf Coast, have heard those words and think they might be empty words. Or as I heard from one union leader in the fossil fuel industry that we just heard that that's a fancy funeral and we don't want that. We want to make sure that as we transition to cleaner energy, that fossil fuel workers are at the table and that we make sure that people are able to pay their mortgage and pay their rent and do their jobs. I can hold Exxon accountable for polluting our communities while still caring about the folks that work there. So I want to make sure that those workers transition into jobs that pay the same salary. that we actually recognize that part of the cost of transitioning to an economy that is cleaner and better for us in the immediate and the long term is also taking care of the workers that are just doing their jobs and have done their jobs honorably and power this country for a century. And so I want those fossil fuel workers to be taken care of. I want to make sure that if they are unemployed that we immediately move them over into equal paying clean energy jobs. want those jobs to be union jobs, just like so many of our fossil fuel jobs are. And so that bill really is, know, traditionally has been a bill that's been supported by the mine workers, has been supported by the utility workers, has been supported by the steel workers and the electric workers. Those, we need to make sure that those folks are a part of this conversation, because we aren't just telling people in fossil fuel, hey, sorry, you know, we've moved on. But no, actually, we're we're making this transition with you as the energy workforce. We're so grateful for those workers' contributions. We're not going to leave them out in the cold as we try to save the planet and save the country. Doug Lewin Yeah, I know you've got to go in a minute. I don't think, I just want to say this kind of in closing. I don't think people really realize this, even though drilling and production in the Permian Basin of Texas is up dramatically. actually produced more oil and gas in Texas 2024. Well, in the United States in 2024, then fueled by Texas, then in any country in the history of the world produced more than Saudi Arabia ever has. the the amount of workers in the industry is down 100,000 from 2014 when it was about 300,000 workers according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, down to about 200,000 workers now. So even with increased production, because there's so much automation, and this will be increasingly true as AI comes into production more and more, there's going to be more and more workers left looking around for what's next. And I think there are big opportunities in geothermal and nuclear, you know, lot of people talk about oil and gas to solar. doesn't make a lot of sense. That's like electricians, but geothermal is drilling, nuclear is a lot of fabrication. Like there are opportunities there. So I'm really glad you're working on that. And again, there's a theme here. Like I can't imagine anybody of any ideological stripe not caring about that. Who wouldn't want to see oil and gas workers that for whatever reason, whether it's automation or less drilling or whatever the reason, have a really good next opportunity. That seems like that would be pretty universal, right? Congressman Greg Casar Well, Sherrod Brown famously was able to continue to be reelected in Ohio in a state that overwhelmingly was voting for Donald Trump at the top of the ticket. so clearly this message of putting workers first moves that core group of voters that don't necessarily associate somebody just with having a D or R next to their name. They want somebody that's going to be fighting for them. And so I've made that pitch. across the island hopefully can continue to build out the group of people that are going to care about working people and the power coming on and the jobs being good more than just sort of the letter next to your name and whether you're on that team or not. Doug LewinCongressman, thanks for being on the Energy Capital Podcast. Is there anything that I didn't ask you that you wish that I would have anything you'd like to say in closing? Congressman Greg Casar No, that was great. Thank you so much for having me, Doug, and for keeping these issues top of mind for all of us. My real hope, yeah, is that here in the energy capital of the country and of the world, that we can wind up having a grid that is reliable when it gets real cold or real hot. Like you said, I grew up here in Texas, and I know it's hot, but not this hot, this early, this long at these temperatures, and also this cold. I mean, I remember when it just used to be a field day at school when there was like a little bit of snow that would melt on the ground. Now it feels like, you know, this is a regular thing that it's freezing over here. And so it's just, it's, got to be a real concern to us and we've got to work together on it. So thanks a lot, Doug Lewin Thank you Congressman. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.douglewin.com/subscribe

Rick Perry, the longest-serving governor of Texas and former U.S. Secretary of Energy, shares his impactful journey in shaping the state's energy landscape. He discusses the importance of an 'all-of-the-above' energy strategy, advocating for nuclear power and innovative technologies like Small Modular Reactors. Perry highlights the balance between government and free-market principles, emphasizes bipartisan opportunities for clean energy, and presents creative solutions for Texas' water challenges. He also champions plant-based medicines for veterans' mental health.

Mary Powell, CEO of Sunrun and a pioneering force in solar energy, discusses the rapid growth of solar and storage in Texas. She highlights how consumer-led initiatives are reshaping the energy landscape and fostering independence. Powell debunks myths surrounding energy storage and emphasizes the role of virtual power plants. The conversation also dives into Texas's rise as a leader in solar, showcasing community resilience and innovations that enhance energy sustainability and practicality for homeowners.

This week’s episode is a bit different. I’m not hosting the podcast — I’m the guest. During the Texas Energy Summit, former Public Utility Commission Chair Becky Klein turned the tables and interviewed me live, right after a panel of legislators and a keynote from current PUC Chair Thomas Gleeson.In this fast-paced conversation, Becky and I covered a wide range of energy topics, including grid reliability, distributed energy resources, and the untapped potential of energy efficiency. We also discussed my personal journey in the energy field, from working on air quality issues at the legislature to founding an energy efficiency non-profit to working in the energy industry and hosting this podcast.Throughout the interview, I shared my vision for the next 5–10 years of Texas’ power market. I’m optimistic about seeing advancements in geothermal energy, energy efficiency, and heat pump adoption. I also believe we’ll see greater decentralization of power, with more distributed generation and expanded transmission. These changes could lower costs, improve grid reliability, and create a more resilient energy future for Texans.But with opportunities come challenges. Texas lags far behind other states in energy efficiency programs and policies, ranking last among states with efficiency goals. I discussed what needs to change — from improving HVAC and heat pump incentives to rethinking how we value distributed energy resources (DERs) for their resilience benefits.Becky brought her wealth of experience and thoughtful questions to the discussion. We also touched on what excites me most about the energy industry today and my advice for students and young leaders entering this field: ask questions, read widely, and develop a strong personal philosophy.I hope you enjoy this unique episode and the conversation as much as I did. Timestamps and show notes are below.Please like, share, subscribe, and leave a five-star review wherever you get your podcasts — it really helps!Timestamps01:21 - Introduction to Energy Efficiency and Demand Response04:14 - My Journey in the Energy Sector07:25 - Vision for Texas Power Market10:09 - Barriers to Energy Efficiency13:31 - The Role of the PUC in Energy Efficiency16:20 - Current State of Energy Efficiency in Texas19:13 - Technological Innovations in Energy Distribution22:21 - Valuing Resiliency in Energy Systems25:28 - Addressing Energy Affordability and Equity28:20 - Advice for Aspiring Energy Professionals ​Show NotesBooks:* The Obstacle is the Way by Ryan Holiday* Climate of Contempt by David Spence* Confronting Climate Gridlock by Daniel Cohan Podcasts:* How to Overcome Ideological Divides and the Climate of Contempt, Energy Capital Podcast* The Past, Present, and Future of the Texas Energy Market with Former PUC Chair Becky Klein, Energy Capital Podcast This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.douglewin.com/subscribe

This episode was recorded just three days after the U.S. presidential election. My guest, UT Law Professor David Spence, recently published an exceptional book Climate of Contempt: How to Rescue the U.S. Energy Transition from Voter Partisanship. I believe this book is perfect for this moment and one of the best I’ve read on climate policy—and I read a lot on climate policy.David and I dove into the roots and contributors of America’s current partisan and ideological divides which have grown rapidly over the past few decades. We discussed not only the challenges this divide presents — though we talked about those extensively — but also some possible solutions. David shows how we can bridge these divides, re-establish trust, and find common ground. We also talked about the Inflation Reduction Act and why energy policy could, maybe, be a unifying area in an increasingly polarized landscape.I found this conversation both important and thought-provoking, and I hope you will too. I highly recommend David’s book; it’s a remarkable piece that is particularly relevant now. If you’re interested in the energy transition, the history of energy-related regulations, or want a deeper understanding of our current political landscape, especially as it relates to climate and energy, I think you’ll enjoy this episode as much as I did.As always, please like, share, and leave a five star review wherever you listen to podcasts. Thank you for being a listener. Timestamps2:31 - The major ideas in Climate of Contempt4:06 - How the thesis of the book connects to the outcome of the US presidential election5:54 - Discontent with the status quo in the US8:09 - The depth of the ideological divide in the US13:27 - How to bridge ideological divides and actively listen (and why it’s so challenging)17:51 - Effectiveness of deliberative polling and in-person, offline interactions. The role of media and social media in driving polarization.23:52 - The importance of active listening, education over persuasion, and not being too sure you are right.29:05 - Is energy a place we can find more common ground? Challenges and opportunities. 37:54 - The future of the Inflation Reduction Act 43:31 - Regulatory uncertainty… what happens next?Show NotesClimate of Contempt: How to Rescue the U.S. Energy Transition from Voter Partisanship by David B. SpenceDavid’s website and blogEnergyTradeoffs.comWorks from Katharine Hayhoe”Spirit of Liberty” – speech from Judge Learned HandAdvanced Manufacturing Production tax creditTranscriptDoug LewinDavid Spence, welcome to the Energy Capital Podcast.David Spence Happy to be here, Doug.Doug LewinIt's great to have you here today. You have written what I think is a really remarkable book and I hope it is read widely. I think it is really illuminating for the moment we're in. We'll of course put a link in the show notes so people can find it easily, but it's called Climate of Contempt, the subtitle, How to Rescue the U.S. Energy Transition from Voter Partisanship. We're recording on Friday, November 8th, the Friday just after the reelection of Donald Trump. So I think that this book is even, I thought it was incredibly relevant before the election, I think it's even more so now. Can we just start David with you just explaining the thesis of the book generally, but also in light of the political earthquake that happened this week?David SpenceSure, happy to. So the main point of the book is to try and reintroduce into the popular debate and also parts of the scholarly debate what I think are some underappreciated forces that are driving regulatory politics and, in the case of what we're both interested in, energy transition politics. And that missing element is what I would call the bottom-up forces that are driving what particularly members of Congress, but all elected politicians do. We hear a lot about the top down forces, about how elites are controlling the regulatory process or the policymaking process. And that's part of the story and not an unimportant part of the story, but a really neglected part of the story is how receptive and sensitive elected politicians are to what voters want or more particularly what they don't want. And so politicians work hard to avoid the kind of mistakes that might lose them the next election. And those forces I think are much more important than most people realize. And that's what the book explores and applies to the energy transition.Doug LewinYeah, and so talk about that a little bit in light of this week.David SpenceSure, sure. So we've all seen probably 40 or 50 takes on what happened the other day in the election. In fact, the New York Times alone has had at least 10 different takes depending upon who's doing the writing. And voters' decisions are complicated. They only get to choose one of two choices, but they're motives and reasons for making those choices are varied and complex. And so among the takes we're seeing are takes crediting fears about inflation, racism, sexism, Harris being too progressive, Harris being not progressive enough, other worries about all kinds of other issues.And again, these tend to be the kinds of things that pundits look at, but among the takes that the New York Times had was one today in which a writer said that what Trump was betting on was that he could make a majority of voters believe that the situation that they face is miserable and getting worse under Democratic administrations. And that's the take that probably comes closest to the way I analyze politics in my book, which focuses on how the changes in the modern media environment make it harder for the truth to win out. And so I analyze that in the pre-election environment, but we can see that same sort of dynamic at work in understanding the results of the election the other day.Doug LewinYeah. And I think, to that latest take, there's also some really good data floating around on the internet now about anti-incumbency globally. This is, I believe, one thing I saw was this is the only time in recorded history, which for this particular metric goes back to 1905, that every incumbent party lost voter share in developing countries. That's never happened before. That every single, whether they were right, left, moderate, that the incumbent party lost voter share. So if Trump's strategy was to lean into the anti-incumbent sentiment, he was definitely picking something up in the zeitgeist here and globally. And sometimes we forget here that we do exist in a global context and media is very global at this point too.David Spence Yeah, and on that, you meant developed countries, right? You said developing, but you meant developed.Doug LewinDeveloped, excuse me, developed, you’re absolutely right.David SpenceYeah, and there's no doubt that the disruption of the pandemic had a huge effect on people's perceptions of where the economy is and where it's going. If you look at charts comparing inflation in the United States, coming out of the pandemic with inflation in other countries. It went up everywhere because of the supply chain disruptions. While we were able to get it under control right before the election, that doesn't mean that voters weren't sincerely shaken by the influence of inflation on their everyday lives. So I'm not meaning to discount economic forces entirely here. But clearly there was a belief that all sorts of conditions of daily life were a lot worse than they actually are heading into the election. We can see that in the exit polling.Doug LewinYeah, I think we all feel it to a certain extent. Like every time I go to a grocery store I'm still kind of shocked at what the prices are. There's obviously some truth to all that and I think that that's why the anti-incumbency sentiment is there. But here's what I wanna zero in on a little bit, David, from your book that I think is so striking. And this has been written about obviously other places, but I think you do a great job applying it to how we deal with energy and climate issues. The ideological divide has gotten so strong. You summarize some of that research. Can you talk a little bit about just how bad it's gotten? And I know people have probably heard this before. Where I want to go with it is really where you go in the book, which is how we actually have conversations across these ideological divides. So let's do both of those things. Part A, the ideological divide itself and how strong is it, sort of this partisan, almost like tribal partisanship. And part B, what is at least part of the recipe for dealing with that fundamental problem.David SpenceSure, so I break that divide into sort of two main parts. One is the familiar ideological polarization, which has been getting worse since the mid to late 1980s. And we measure that as political scientists. And the book summarizes those measurements. But both in the electorate and in Congress, we have seen a steady divergence ideologically between the parties.It started with the Republican Party moving to the right after the Reagan administration. And a couple of decades later, the Democratic Party started moving to the left. And we are now as measured by political scientists, at least in Congress, further apart than at any time since before the Civil War. So those philosophical ideological differences have gotten very sharp, which makes it harder for voters to find the ability to talk to one another across these partisan divides, particularly difficult for members of Congress to reach across the aisle and get things done when there's not somebody in the other party with whom you share at least a little bit of a policy framework. We used to see ideological overlap in both houses of Congress as recently as 25 years ago. There's none in either now. And so that's half the story in terms of how voters have changed. The other half is really what you referred to as tribalism and what I do as well in the book. And this is really what political scientists would call affective partisanship or negative partisanship. This is animosity or even in some cases hatred of the other party that we're also seeing in the data. And we see this in a number of polls that are administered by Pew Research and by the University of Michigan under their national election study. But they show sharp increases in the 21st century, so this is a little bit more recently, we've seen sharp increases in dislike of the other party by members of each party. And those, the levels of animosity that respondents are showing is getting extremely concerning. And so these two things together give members of Congress and other elected politicians the incentive to not cooperate with the other party and to express their contempt for what the other party stands for and what it wants. Hence the first part of the title of my book. And so, reaching across the aisle, working together, talking to one another has gotten very difficult. And I argue that the modern media environment, that is the replacement of traditional daily newspapers, daily news, network news, or the displacement of that in today's information flows by much more fragmented sources of information, a lot of its ideological media, along with bots and press releases and all this other stuff that's trying to persuade us more than it's trying to educate us. This exacerbates both the ideological polarization and the partisan tribalism. And as we start talking to each other more online and less offline, we end up in these echo chambers that amplify these effects even further. And so that's the problem, that's the part A, as you put it in your question. The part B is about breaking down those barriers of communication and talking to one another more. After this election this week, I'm seeing more people emphasizing that, which is really encouraging. In my book, in the final chapter, that's the prescription I offer. It's not quick. It's not a magic bullet. It's not the only thing that will get us back from the sort of decline in our democratic institutions and norms that we're seeing. But I think it's an important part of the solution. And I can go into that in more detail if you'd like.Doug LewinYeah, yeah, I do want to talk more about that, but I just, first of all, yeah, I want to give you a quick break, but also just kind of add in a couple other notes from your book that I think are just spot on in this particular situation. You talk about, I'm not sure this is in the book. I may have actually heard you speak about this when you're lecturing or when I've heard you speak other places, and you just said it now, education, not persuasion. I think part of that too is that really active listening component, really trying to understand where somebody else is coming from. You have two quotes in your book that I particularly love. You might be the only person to quote both Ted Lasso and Learned Hand in your book. Congratulations. I should have written down the whole Learned at Hand quote. We'll put it in the show notes. I don't know if you've memorized it, but it's the spirit that is not too sure, right? That like we enter a conversation not thinking I have the right answer and my job is to get you to adopt the same answer I already have. And building on that, you quote Ted Lasso saying, be curious, not judgmental. Because if you do enter a conversation with like, hey, I'm right, you're wrong. If the other person doesn't end that conversation with your same belief, you're going to end up being judgmental. And there is so much of that going on across the partisan divide right now. So the spirit that is not too sure it is right, this openness, this willingness to listen to others, I think is really fundamental to this. And so you can, I want you to elaborate on that, but I am also curious about, I wanna hear more about what you go into in that last chapter of the book of how, what are the actual mechanics? Because I agree with you, I'm hearing that sentiment a lot this week. But what I don't see a lot is the how, and you get into that in your book.David SpenceYeah, so the Learned Hand quote that you reference is from a 1944 speech he gave back in the days when a judge who's not a Supreme Court justice could be famous and a public figure. He was asked to give a speech on Constitution Day 1944. So we're coming to the end of World War II, fighting against fascism in Europe and worrying about another authoritarian type of regime, communism in the Soviet Union and ultimately, a few years later, the Eastern Bloc of Europe. So he had those two things in mind when he talked about what he called the spirit of liberty. And that's the name of the speech. It's a short speech and I consider it a brilliant speech, but he says the spirit of liberty is the spirit that is not quite sure that it is right, that weighs the other person's view. These are not precise quotes, I'm paraphrasing. Weighs the other person's view without bias, at least to the extent you can. And that is something that sort of modern psychologists might call actively open-minded thinking, or we might call it fallibilism. The idea that I might be wrong and I can learn by having other people audit my beliefs. That's the spirit or the idea or the mental state that I think is really hard to sustain in today's political environment and the modern sort of information environment, particularly social media and ideological media makes it even harder to sustain. And I explain in chapter four of the book, the sort of structural reasons why that is. It's not that people are lazy or people have become less tolerant. It's that the incentives they face are pushing them toward premature certainty about things, which makes it harder to entertain the possibility that we might be wrong about this or that or this aspect of our beliefs. And so recovering that actively open-minded thinking, being curious, more curious and less judgmental, in Ted Lasso speak, means that we have to find places where we can talk across ideological and political boundaries with people in ways that can be productive. And that sounds really difficult to modern audiences because we are fed a steady diet of the most unreasonable representations of those on the other side of the political divide. And it seems futile. If you're watching Jordan Klepper interview people at a Trump rally, and that's your conception of the Trump voter, it probably feels like a futile thing to try and talk to people across the political divide. But there are ways to do it. And so as you say the last chapter of the book gets into what a lot of the research suggests about how to be influential and how to maintain that actively open-minded thinking mindset while having dialogue with people who think about politics differently than you do. And I'm happy to go into that in more detail unless you want to sort of steer me in a different direction.Doug LewinI do want to talk about that at least a little bit. I do obviously encourage the audience to get the book. And again, we'll have a link for how to find it. But I would like to get into that a little bit. I have been thinking a lot about, and I've talked about this on the podcast before, there were in the 1990s as Texas was looking to restructure the electricity market, a series of meetings in Texas. I believe according to Pat Wood, the chairman of the Public Utility Commission under George W. Bush at the time, 16 different meetings, 16 different cities. They were one- or two-day long meetings. They had 100 to 200 people at each of them chose randomly across a broad cross section of Texas. They paid them for their time to come. They gave them some education. It was education, not persuasion, right?  You have a chapter on energy trade-offs. It was exactly that kind of thing, right? Here's the benefits of this kind of generation and the pros and cons of each one. And this was an extraordinary process. And Pat Wood says it was one of the reasons they were able to pass the restructuring bill with near unanimous votes in both the House and Senate. It's almost hard to imagine such a massive piece of legislation passing with that kind of support. But people understood, the legislators understood, that the people of Texas had a chance to learn about this, voice their opinion about it. I've been thinking about that a lot. That was a system developed by Professor Fishkin at University of Texas called deliberative polling. Maybe we need something like that these days. Cause where else are we going to have an opportunity for people from around the state of totally different ideological backgrounds, like you said, to not see each other as a caricature.  But to actually… and we don't, David, like I coach my kids' baseball team. I don't know what the politics of the different coaches are, but I love all those guys. They're great. They would do anything for those kids. I don't ask them what their, there's no litmus test out there. They're good people and they probably have, many of them have very different political beliefs than me.But again, like to your example of the Jordan Klepper interview, and this happens, whether it's left looking at right or right looking at left, and I do think we wanna be careful about equivalency, we should talk about that. But there is at least a large part of that going on on the left and the right. So I'm interested in your thoughts on deliberative polling, like is there maybe the potential to get people together to have a chance to actually talk about policy in an environment where the temperature is turned down in exactly in that Learned Hand ‘the spirit which is not too sure that it's right,’ where people can actually listen to each other and actually find solutions. Cause I'm just worried at this point, when you see those charts of how far apart we have gone, that we are further apart ideologically, thinking lower of people that are different than us, politically than at any time since the Civil War. That's terrifying. Like we need to have structures where we get together and talk to each other and realize we're Americans and Texans first and fill in the blank with whatever adjective, conservative, liberal, Republican, Democrat, left, right, progressive, conservative, et cetera. Like that is second, third or fourth. So that's one I'm curious about your thoughts on deliberative polling. And then what are some of  these other mechanisms where we can actually get people together and learn from each other and talk to each other across the ideological divides.David SpenceSo a couple of reactions to that. So those meetings were probably, what 2000, 2001? Doug LewinA little earlier 90s. Yeah. You're close, 96, 97, 98 right in there.David SpenceYeah, the full effect of the modern media environment hadn't kicked in, at least on politicians at that point. But you're right that those were face-to-face meetings. That's sort of a key factor here. We're talking to people face-to-face. The way we talk to each other face-to-face is different than the way we talk to each other online. In a face-to-face conversation, you are more respectful, you're more civil, you're more cautious, you're exploring each other's views. You probably in many cases want to maintain the relationship you have with that other person. If it's you and the other coaches, you don't want to alienate them if you talk about politics. But it's important that we do talk face-to-face about politics across these divides because it's virtually impossible to sustain productive conversations online.So the benefit of those meetings and the benefit of deliberative polling is that people see each other face-to-face. And the second benefit is that they have a common source of information. What Professor Fishkin did in those experiments was he took people who disagreed on a subject and gave them what experts on both sides of that issue agreed were the sort of common facts that they both shared, the truth. The stuff that they could both agree was the truth. And we found that when presented with that information and given the opportunity to talk across perspectives about it, that their views came closer together. So we can work out problems, we're more likely to work out problems face-to-face. The difference, the reason I asked you about the timing of the Texas meetings was that in Congress, the people who get together and talk about things face to face have to face the voters later. And the voters that are driving their futures are the voters who vote in primaries in most cases, because most members of Congress represent safe seats. And so these are the most ideologically extreme members of their own party and the most negatively partisan members of their own party. So whatever action they take, even if they can sort of privately agree with people on the other side about what a constructive solution to a problem is, they're gonna have to answer those voters. And right now, anyway, those voters seem to punish cooperation and punish working across the aisle with the other party. And that's what we have to change. We have to change that voting behavior, which is a lot, you know, it's a slow process. We have to talk to one another more productively across these boundaries. And I don't know if this is the point you want to get into how that happens, but there are bodies of research out there from a number of different disciplines that all seem to point in the same direction about how to sort of put into practice that Learned Hand/Ted Lasso advice. And it really involves stuff that we do instinctively when we talk face to face with family and friends. And that is essentially starting a difficult conversation, one we expect to be difficult, with questions. Asking the other person what they believe and why they believe it. And then really hearing, you use the phrase active listening. Another quote I have is from a friend of mine who's in the communications business who says that active listening is more than waiting for your turn to talk. It means actually hearing what the other person is saying, considering it, giving it some respect and formulating a follow-up, question usually, based on what you hear. And so it might be something as simple as well. Okay, I can see why you'd be concerned about that. What if that wasn't true? Or what if we could change that? Would you still feel the same way about this issue? So that's just one example. And I give lots of examples in Chapter 6.But those kind of iterated, careful, respectful conversations, I think, can be successful with a significant subset of voters on the other side of an issue. And the size of that subset is debated by scholars. We talked the other day when I was visiting your class about Katharine Hayhoe, who's a climate scientist who specializes in climate communication. She's very optimistic that these methods can work on most people. The polling data that I cite in the book suggests that they ought to be able to work on about a third of the people out there, but that may be enough to make a difference for the climate future. And so I think this is a necessary part of regaining our democracy, the least functioning democracy, the way it functioned when you and I were young.Doug Lewin I agree. Actually, I found the quote from your book from Learned Hand and we will include a link to the full speech, but I do want to just read the part that is in your book. This is the quote from Learned Hand in his Constitution Day speech. “What then is the spirit of liberty? I cannot define it. I can only tell you my own faith. The spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure that it is right. The spirit of liberty is the spirit which seeks to understand the mind of other men and women. The spirit of liberty is the spirit which weighs their interests alongside its own without bias.” It's just an incredible quote and I think one that we all, regardless of background, really need to think about, the language you emphasize in the very next paragraph in your book: not too sure, seeks to understand. The fact that he included men and women in a speech in 1944 is pretty remarkable as well.David SpenceYeah, he was a brilliant jurist. He was widely considered the most brilliant jurist, even though he served in a circuit court of appeals, not the Supreme Court at the time. There is a wonderful biography of him that sort of gets into his judicial and political philosophies. And he's a really admirable person because he lived out or tried to live out that ambition that he articulates there.And that was at a time when the specter of authoritarianism was looming large. And as you know from reading my book, there are a number of historians that see that specter looming large again. And so it seems like an appropriate reminder about the norms of political communication that we need to maintain in order for our democracy to function well.Doug Lewin Yeah. Well, and really when you talk about that one-third, and I really hope it's bigger. I want to believe it's bigger. I want to look at the data you're referencing and get really familiar with this because I would definitely want it to be bigger, but let's say it was a third. I mean, really what you're talking about is the center, right? And there is this, this is one of the biggest problems here is when you do move to the poles, you know, to the extremes on either side and there's not equivalency there and it'd be interesting to hear you talk about that too, cause there is some really good empirical data on this, that the right has moved further to the extreme, although the left is moving further in that direction actively as well. When that happens, there's not enough left in the center. And I think what really starts to happen too, is we get into this situation where it's a very zero sum thinking kind of an environment where somebody's like, I'm winning, you're losing, rather than, and I think this is part of that Spirit of Liberty too. If I may expand on Judge Learned Hand's brilliant concepts here, it's not just that spirit, which is not too sure that it's right, it's also that spirit that is willing to give something. It is the same spirit, I think, right? Because I may not be exactly right, the things that I exactly want may not be the full gamut. And this is a place, and this is where I want to go next. You can comment on any of that you want, obviously, but where I want to kind of go next is I really do think that energy and climate, though climate is so partisan coded at this point, but let's stick with energy for a minute.  Energy is one of those places where I think we can find common ground. If we can get people to a place where they are in-person and they are active listening and they are not too sure they are right. And they are willing to compromise. We can make major progress because fundamentally, I think most people want the same things. They want a reliable grid. They want lower costs. Many people, and this is true right and left, like you have a very strong group on the right that really wants solar and storage wherever they live because, I don't want to be so reductive as to call it prepper, cause that has like a very negative connotation for some people. But if you think of it in terms of like, take the baggage away from the term prepper, like they want to be prepared. Like whatever happens, a winter storm, a heat wave, God knows what. They want to be ready for it. And having power at their house is one of those things. The imperative at this point for the United States to be globally competitive, to not cede industries of the future to China. That was one of the rare places where Biden sort of continued a lot of Trump's policies that were pretty tough on China and really trying to incubate and grow energy industries here in the United States. I'm curious of your thoughts on that, the opportunity maybe for energy, if folks can get out of the persuasion mindset and into the more listening mindset, like there might be a whole lot more common ground on energy than we're acknowledging.David SpenceYou're right that there is an empirical literature measuring the spread of misinformation and false belief and negative emotional messages online. There's an entire set of scholars that study that, and I link many of them at the website for the book. Those scholars document more misinformation flowing, more right-leaning messages that are false messages spreading around the web than left-leaning messages. And that's probably an artifact of the fact that right-wing media, ideological media, has grown quicker and is much more popular than at least so far, than ideological left-wing media.  So the history of Fox News, Fox sort of pioneered an approach to broadcast cable news and punditry that MSNBC and other left-leaning outlets have followed to a certain extent, but Fox is much more popular. It has twice the audience of MSNBC and three times the audience of CNN.So you're just gonna see more of this kind of messaging sort of floating around and more sort of online and radio sources that sort of follow that same model. More of those exist on the right or at least the more popular ones are on the right than on the left. And that could change, again, the right got started on this unfortunate project before the left did.  And so it may be that Democrats and liberals are catching up on that. So that's one point. And in terms of sort of putting this open-minded thinking, this Learned Hand philosophy into practice in the energy space, I think you're absolutely right. And people who follow your podcast and your Twitter, you know, will learn about the particulars of this. This will resonate with them because they understand the particulars of Texas energy better than the people who don't follow your work. But yeah, there's lots of common ground in the energy space if we're focused on trying to solve problems. And the right-left divide doesn't map that neatly onto energy arguments right now anyway. So if we go beyond Texas, there are people on the left that are sort of really strong proponents of the energy transition who would like to see competitive markets in their state and they don't have them. And there are other people who are strong advocates of the transition who think that it should be led by investor-owned utilities that are traditionally regulated or, and there's another set of people who think that it should be public power and there's another set of people. So these ideological divides don't fit the energy sector's problems all that neatly. On the other hand, the intense partisan tribalism does seem to be creating a national Republican brand that can be hostile to anything that mentions climate change, as you noted in your question, and increasingly anyway, to utility scale renewables as well. And so we saw this week, one of the Trump advisors sending a note to the FERC chairman telling him to stop doing controversial things, by which I think he meant, you know, pro-renewable energy, pro-clean energy things. Trump has sort of himself famously opposed wind energy. And so we have these two forces butting up against each other, the idea that there are probably practical solutions that have common ground associated with them if we just get together and talk about solving these problems. But we also have the fear of voter punishment for sort of cooperating. And we'll see how it all plays out. I think you know that there are some Republicans in the House that would like to preserve the Inflation Reduction Act and the incentives it provides for energy transition technologies, how many they are and whether their expressions of that preference will translate into votes against repealing it. We may find out if the Republicans take the house. So I share your optimism about the possibility of bipartisan solutions and of finding common ground if we can get away from these political election forces that sort of distort that process.Doug LewinYeah, and I think it's important to acknowledge and this again, to a large extent, because there was that whole process of deliberative polling, when Texas was restructured, it was really a conservative policy that put in place, a market structure and energy-only market as it's often called, which means that only that energy that's producing gets paid. It's highly competitive. But it is, it has been very, very good for clean energy because clean energy is incredibly low cost. It has, according to a colleague at UT, Josh Rhodes, you know, $31 billion from 2010 to 2022. And that was because of a conservative policy that sometimes will drive the left or liberals sort of in general crazy when they look at Texas and they're like, wait a minute, how do you guys have more wind, solar, storage than any other place? But you didn't have a policy adopted by a Democratic governor and Democratic legislature. Important to note that in the nineties, there was a Democratic house, right? It was Speaker Laney at the time. So it was divided government. And that is a really important point, but there was compromise across the chambers. Then Governor Bush wanted to run for president and talk about renewables, he actually would talk about renewables as one of the things he was for, but those conservative policies really did lead to more clean energy, which again, it was a different time, but, and maybe I'm just grasping at straws, but I want to at least think that there's the potential of something to build on there.David Spence No, I think you're absolutely right. Part of it's conservative, most of it's conservative. We have very few barriers to entry at the generation stage here in ERCOT. So it's easy to build. We happen to have good wind and solar resources, and we happen to have hungry cities that are growing that want those resources. But let's not forget, and I know you know this and have said it before, that we also socialize the cost of building big transmission lines out to those windy and sunny areas which also were part of the story of how at least the wind grew so fast, to sort of dwarf wind generation in other states. And I think that's why there are strong energy transition and climate advocates who look to Texas as a model, or at least to competitive markets as a model, for building more wind and solar because they see traditional investor owned utilities as obstacles to that kind of progress.Doug LewinLet me just also ask you about the Inflation Reduction Act. You referenced, I think this is really important and I think will get a whole lot of coverage in the coming months and really over the year, because where they would, where Congress would sort of dismantle the IRA, if they choose to do so, assuming the House is Republican, which it looks like it will be. We’re recording on Friday, November 8th. So when you're listening to this, you probably already know whether the US House is going to be led by Democrats or Republicans, David and I do not. But it looks like it will be Republican. And if that's the case, it would be through budget reconciliation. So this project is going to this, this process rather, will play out over the course of a year. But as much as anything is clear to me right now, and not a lot is very clear, I don't think the entire thing will be taken apart. There will be elements of it that survive. You mentioned the 18 Republicans who sent a letter to Speaker Johnson saying while it was flawed. And so it wasn't like a full throated endorsement of the IRA and they didn't vote for it when it came through. They did say that there were aspects of it that they wanted to preserve. Can you kind of look into the crystal ball a little bit, not asking you to make predictions, but sort of based on probabilities and you're smart on this stuff and follow this stuff. What are some of the areas where you think the IRA might be able to continue? One of those that I think is really interesting is what is called the 45X. It's the manufacturing incentives, right? And we've seen a lot of manufacturing in Texas, but even more so in South Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, a lot of states, obviously with Republican governors that are very, very excited to have that manufacturing there. And frankly, like President Trump could go around the country cutting ribbons and take credit for what – I mean, it would be bizarre and weird, but it could happen, right? They could take credit for a lot of the things that were passed if they don't dismantle it, in which case, if they don't dismantle it, they might deserve a little credit. So maybe the manufacturing, are there other elements that you're looking at? Like, hey, heading into this new era, whatever it is, here's some areas where there might be some potential.David SpenceYeah, I will be actually posting a blog on the book website. I do blog regularly, but one of the posts that will be coming up in a couple of days looks at those 18 letter signers and their electoral circumstances heading into the election. And to the extent that there are results, most of them have, their race has been certified by the AP by now, but four or five have not. 14 of the 18 were from districts that Cook Political Report would call relatively competitive. They were either toss-ups or lean one way or the other. Those are the relatively competitive districts under their taxonomy. So these were people that probably had to worry about the other party, Democrats in this case, since all the signatories were Republicans, had to worry a little bit about gaining some votes from the other party. And four were not, four were from very strong Republican districts. And they happened to be people who were getting a lot of IRA or infrastructure bill money. And so you can sort of see this as a contest, or we can look at these 18 letter signers and say, this is sort of the struggle between bringing home the bacon to their district, the economic sort of incentive to make their constituents happy that way versus the sort of partisan side of things. Those four that were in solidly red districts, are they gonna be punished at the next primary for cooperating or for expressing preferences for something that the Freedom Caucus doesn't like? They want to see the entire IRA repealed and they objected to the letter that the 18 sent. And so that'll be interesting. It'll be interesting to watch their futures. Most of them won or look like they're going to win. A few probably will lose. But that'll be interesting to see where they end up. In terms of the kinds of things that could survive in a partial repeal, I share your sentiment that it's probably the things that look more industrial or likely to create permanent high paying jobs. That's another way of looking at it, right?Wind and solar jobs tend to be construction jobs. Building a carbon sequestration facility probably creates more, at that facility, probably creates more permanent jobs. Same thing with a hydrogen production plant or even a geothermal plant, all those kinds of things, or manufacturing, solar manufacturing and so on. Those are permanent jobs. And I imagine they'd be the kind of things that Republicans might be more comfortable with. See them as serving the people they see as their main constituents and their needs, even in a solid red district. And as you know, and probably have said already on your podcast, most of the money is going to red districts. And so it'll be interesting to see how they respond to that. If they repeal popular parts of the IRA, it'll be interesting to see what happens in the 2026 elections to see if they pay for that.Doug LewinYeah, and a lot of the things you just mentioned,you know, geothermal uses a lot of the same skills for oil and gas workers. A lot of oil and gas execs are leading the most prominent geothermal companies. Fervo, Sage, headquartered here in Texas, are two very prominent examples. Hydrogen, carbon capture, even solar to an extent, right? We're seeing oil and gas companies in Texas really wanting to connect to the grid because the power is cheaper from renewables than from diesel generation. So I think that's going to be an interesting dynamic too is how does the business community and particularly some of the industrial players, the oil and gas players. You know, Trump keeps talking about drill, baby drill, the CEO of Exxon, before the election gave an interview on CNBC. And he said, I don't know how drill, baby drill translates into policy because we're already at record levels of drilling. We drilled more in the United States last year than any country has ever drilled in the history of the world, including Saudi Arabia in any year. And if you do end up finding a policy that causes more drilling, guess what happens to prices, right? They go lower and now your oil and gas companies are going out of business. So how does that business voice exist in a second Trump administration is going to be interesting. Happy for you to comment on that if you want. I am going to turn that into a question because you are a professor of law. One thing that companies of any kind really sort of universally disdain is regulatory uncertainty. We are heading into a time of, I think, extraordinary regulatory uncertainty, both because of the election, but also because of some of the things the Supreme Court has done. Can you talk a little bit, I mean, in your book you spend a lot of time on regulations and how they've evolved, just a little bit on kind of where we are with that, some of the things the courts have done recently and how you see that changing in the new political environment?David SpenceYeah, it depends on how far back we go. Certainly when there was more common ground, there was more policy stability. And the historical part of my book talks about those eras when there was common ground and there was sort of more policy stability. But ever since the sort of end of the 20th century, we've started to see, at least in terms of executive branch policies, fairly sharp pivots, what one scholar calls regulatory oscillation, in energy and environmental policy generally, not just climate, but all sorts of environmental policies and energy policies have flip-flopped back and forth, depending upon which party is in control of the White House. Now, there are limits to this that are mostly right now about the attention span of the executive or what they tend to prioritize, because the executive branch produces a whole lot of policy. And so it's impossible really for a president to prioritize everything and to sort of change everything they might want to change. They have to invest resources in changing rules, which require new rule makings, which require following the Administrative Procedures Act, publishing the proposed rule, listening to comments, getting through judicial review. So there's a lot of transaction costs associated with reversing federal policy. But nevertheless, we've seen Democrat and Republican presidents prioritizing environmental issues and climate issues recently enough to want to do that. And so we will see a repeal of the Biden power plant rule and we'll see a repeal of the vehicle standards and other sort of climate initiatives from the Biden administration. Chances are, if the previous Trump administration is any indication, chances are there'll be a lot of litigation associated with that. Presumably, his advisors have learned from some of the failed litigation they had. But now, I would expect to see more and more regulatory oscillation for as long as the negative partisanship and polarization continues to increase. And which is why I spend so much of the focus of the book on trying to change that through promotion of more productive forms of dialogue across party lines.Doug LewinYeah, it really would make a big difference, not only for our society, like first and foremost for our society and the continuation of that spirit of liberty and democracy itself. That's the sort of  first order thing, but there is a second order thing there that I think the policy outcomes on energy and climate would be a lot better there too. This is great. I really love your book. I think anybody that particularly for those that want to understand energy policy and energy regulation at a deeper level. Obviously there are things in the book that I already knew, but in the spirit of Learned Hand, there were quite a few that I didn't. As people who listen to this know, I'm kind of a nerd on this stuff. And I pride myself on knowing a lot of things, but I learned a lot from your book, there were many different aspects of the regulatory history I was not familiar with. So I really can't endorse the book more strongly. I hope folks give it a read. Tell us where they can find you. We've mentioned a few and we'll put them in the show notes. You've mentioned your website where you blog, which is climateofcontempt.com, right? Where else can folks find you?David Spence Well, I'm on the University of Texas Law School faculty pages, which advertise some of my work. I have another website that I am just getting going again after going dormant in the pandemic called energytradeoffs.com. And otherwise, I'm around Austin. I appreciate the kind words about the book and right back at you. I've learned a lot from your podcast and especially about Texas markets. I think we all depend on you among a few, very few others to sort of really get the sort of nitty gritty about Texas electricity markets. And so I appreciate that.Doug LewinThanks, David. Anything I should have asked you that I didn't, anything else you want to just say in closing?David SpenceNo, I really enjoyed the conversation and I appreciate the opportunity to get a little bit deeper into this sort of philosophy of actively open-minded thinking. Not everybody asks me as much about that as you did and I think that's really a crucial part of the book. So yeah, I've enjoyed it.Doug LewinI mean it is the way out of this mess, like, if this experiment in democracy is going to work, we have to get better at that. I firmly believe that. And I think your book is a contribution on that and on the other stuff, which people probably ask you more of, and I think is incredibly important too, obviously, but I really do think that piece is foundational. Hey, thanks for being on the podcast. Thanks for writing this book. The last thing I'll say is I'm going to need to have you back at some point as these different legal processes start playing out. I mean, it's going to be, there's going be a lot to unpack, in the next year or two. And I'll look forward to having you help us do that, David, if you're willing.David SpenceIt's been my pleasure, Doug, and I'm happy to come back anytime you want.Doug LewinThanks so much.  This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.douglewin.com/subscribe