Trump II: A Chance for More Energy Freedom?

I voted against Donald Trump in the last election and have never been a fan of his.

That said, I am cautiously optimistic that the next four years come with a real possibility of improvement in energy policy at the federal level.

The optimism comes from the fact that energy advocate Alex Epstein will have some influence over energy policy in the new administration, and he has a clear, well-thought-out plan for things that are both possible during that time and will cause improvements within a comparable time span. Any of these happening would be great news.

And he has proposed 25.

The caution comes from the fact that this is happening on Donald Trump's watch. Yes, very little, if any, would have happened in a Harris administration, but while Trump might be receptive to these ideas, he is an inconsistent thinker: This means that he could seriously undercut whatever improvement he makes in energy policy with, for example, punitive tariffs that will cause gas prices to skyrocket as the initial shock to the energy (and energy-related) markets that would destabilize.

And longer-term, if Trump undercuts these improvements badly enough, he will play into the hands of anti-capitalists, who will point to his policies, good and bad alike, and promise to dismantle them all.

That said, I highly recommend reading them all at Epstein's blog, where he presents them in an easily-digestible bullet format, with related measures grouped together under broader goals.

These goals are:

• Unleash Responsible Development
• End Preferences for Unreliable Electricity
• Set Environmental Standards Using Cost-Benefit Analysis
• Address Climate Danger Through Resilience and Innovation, Not Punishing America
• Unleash Nuclear Energy From Pseudoscientific Restrictions

The six ideas for unleashing nuclear, each of which he briefly elaborates, are:

• Change the NRC's mission from infinite risk reduction to maximum facilitation of safe nuclear energy.
• Set science-based safety thresholds for radiation.
• Embrace cost-effective approaches to used nuclear fuel.
• Promote nuclear R&D using existing DOE resources.
• Expedite permitting for nuclear plants.
• Base nuclear evacuation guidelines on objective cost-benefit analysis.

This is not a plan to completely separate the government from the economy, or even just the energy sector, as moral and practical a long-term goal that be. But it can be a first step, and it buys time to work towards such a goal: As history has shown repeatedly, when an economy stifled by central planning is freed up even a little bit, prosperity noticeably improves.

I recently enjoyed seeing Epstein mop up the floor with RFK, Jr. in a debate about fossil fuels. (As a bonus, RFK, Jr. reacts defensively at one point to Epstein's apt and often-used analogy of vaccine skepticism to bad thinking about fossil fuels.)

Donald Trump is no capitalist, and he could more than undercut these fantastic policy suggestions with atrocious trade policy, but his second presidency may well bring Americans relief from decades of destructive energy policy caused by environmentalism.

-- CAV