Columbia Energy Exchange

In passing and signing the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022, Congress and the Biden administration infused hundreds of billions of dollars into the energy transition. It was the largest investment in energy and climate in U.S. history. 

At the same time, the law left many countries worried over provisions requiring domestic manufacturing, which some see as protectionist. It’s a friction that’s part of ongoing green trade tensions. As other countries implement their own major climate action plans, some include industrial policies that challenge international trade rules and norms. 

Two years in, how are other countries responding to the Inflation Reduction Act? Can trade policy catalyze investment in and around clean energy in emerging markets and developing economies? And what does the concept of “friendshoring” mean?

This week host Jason Bordoff talks with Sarah Bianchi about her work in the Biden administration and how climate policy and trade policy intersect.

Sarah is a senior managing director and chief strategist of international political affairs and public policy at Evercore ISI. She is a distinguished visiting fellow at the Center on Global Energy Policy and is on the advisory board of CGEP’s new Trade and Clean Energy Transition Program to examine the intersection of climate action, trade policy, national security, and industrial strategy.

She has nearly 30 years of experience in both the public and private sector. Most recently, she served as deputy U.S. trade representative from 2021 to 2024, overseeing critical trading relationships across Asia and Africa. Her portfolio covered all aspects of trade, including the energy transition and the implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act.

In 1953, the New York Yankees beat the Brooklyn Dodgers in the World Series, “From Here to Eternity” won the Academy Award for Best Motion Picture. And on May 24 deep in the  education section of The New York Times, there was a short piece titled “How Industry May Change Climate.”

In the years after, scientists went from writing about the possible impacts of pollution on climate to warning U.S. presidents. And energy policy expert and scholar Jay Hakes says there’s much more to the story.

From scientists who quietly worked to address growing environmental threats, to lawmakers who deliberated in Congress and the White House over what to do about them, Jay says there’s a history that hasn’t been told. In his new book, Jay looks at these early climate change pioneers and asks about the challenges they faced.  

What was it like trying to influence the White House? What solutions did these pioneers offer? And how can their stories further our discourse around climate change today? 

This week, we go back to a conversation from August between host Bill Loveless and Jay Hakes about his book “The Presidents and the Planet: Climate Change Science and Politics from Eisenhower to Bush.” 

Jay is a scholar and author on U.S. energy policy. From 2000-2013 he served as the director of the Jimmy Carter Presidential Library. He also served in both the Obama and Clinton administrations, including a seven-year stint as director of the U.S. Energy Information Administration. 

Jay’s other books include “Energy Crises: Nixon, Ford, Carter, and Hard Choices in the 1970s” and “A Declaration of Energy Independence.”

Emerging markets and developing economies are set to account for the largest source of emissions growth in the coming decades, according to the International Energy Agency. As population growth in developing countries around the world increases, so will their demand for energy. And historically, these countries have looked to fossil fuels to support their demand growth.

But even though emissions from these countries are increasing, their historical cumulative emissions pale in comparison to those emitted by a few wealthy countries – including the U.S. It’s an imbalance that has major implications when it comes to equity and the energy transition.

This week host Jason Bordoff talks with Rahul Tongia about his work on climate equity and his views on net-zero emissions commitments. They also discuss carbon pricing, as well as his approach to establish a system that incentivizes low-emissions countries to keep their emissions lower, even as they use fossil fuels for longer.

Rahul is a senior fellow with the Centre for Social and Economic Progress in New Delhi, where he co-leads the Energy, Natural Resources, and Sustainability group. He helped establish the Smart Grid space in India and is founding advisor of the India Smart Grid Forum. Rahul is a non-resident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a professor at Carnegie Mellon University.

The artificial intelligence boom is fueling a massive uptick in energy demand globally. 

A Goldman Sachs report from earlier this year claimed that processing a single ChatGPT query requires almost ten times the amount of electricity as a single Google search. 

But it’s not just ChatGPT queries driving up demand. As we transition to more renewable energy sources, AI is becoming critical to managing and improving efficiency across our electric grid. 

So how are some of the biggest American tech companies securing the power they need to meet demand? They’re going nuclear. 

Tech giant Microsoft recently secured a deal to restart the last functional reactor at Three Mile Island with access to 100% of the power generated. And Amazon announced a $500 million investment to develop small modular nuclear reactors. It’s a sign that large tech companies see data centers – and the AI they enable –  as critical to their futures. 

This week, host Bill Loveless talks with Jason Bordoff and Jared Dunnmon about their latest co-written column for Foreign Policy, titled “America’s AI Leadership Depends on Energy.”

Jason is founding director of the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs. He’s also a professor of professional practice in international and public affairs, the co-founding dean emeritus at the Columbia Climate School, and a former senior director on the staff of the U.S. National Security Council.

Jared is a nonresident fellow at the Center on Global Energy Policy. He’s also a former technical director for artificial intelligence at the U.S. Defense Department’s Defense Innovation Unit.

Escalating tensions between Israel and Iran, the world’s seventh-largest producer of crude oil, have fueled concern over oil price volatility for the past few weeks. 

But the oil market isn’t reacting to geopolitical tensions in the Middle East as dramatically as it has in the past. Despite an ongoing war in Gaza and Israel, Israel’s attack on Hezbollah, and attacks by Houthis in the Red Sea, the price of oil hasn’t changed much. China’s slowing economy and the U.S.’ increased domestic production of oil seem to be keeping prices down… at least for now. 

Still, renewed fighting between Israel and Iran has oil markets feeling nervous. A regional war could drive up prices, impacting the global economy. 

In an interview recorded yesterday, host Jason Bordoff talks with Helima Croft and Javier Blas about the current state of oil markets, and how global instability could impact their future. 

Helima is a managing director and head of global commodity strategy and Middle East and North Africa research at RBC Capital Markets. Helima joined RBC Capital Markets from Barclays, where she was a managing director and head of North American commodities research. 

Javier is an opinion columnist for Bloomberg covering energy and commodities. Javier is coauthor of  the 2021 book “The World for Sale: Money, Power and the Traders Who Barter the Earth’s Resources.”

Europe is facing a critical challenge. When it comes to advanced technology innovation, labor productivity, and affordable energy, it's not keeping up with the U.S. and China. At least that’s the take from Mario Draghi, former European Central Bank president, in his European Commission report last month titled, “The Future of European Competitiveness.”

The last five years for the European Union have been tumultuous – from the pandemic to an energy crisis sparked by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, to the European Green Deal. How Europe moves forward in the face of these challenges will directly impact its short and long-term energy security, and the pace of its transition to clean energy. And it’s all playing out against the backdrop of an ever-worsening climate crisis. 

This week, host Jason Bordoff talks with Kadri Simson. Kadri has been the European Commissioner for Energy since 2019. Before that, she was the Estonian minister for economic affairs, and held various other positions in the Estonian government. 

Kadri visited the Columbia campus during Climate Week in New York City.

They discussed the impact of Russia’s attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, Europe’s progress in weaning itself off Russian gas, and member states’ attitudes toward nuclear power, among other topics.

According to recently released data, Norway is the first country in the world with more electric vehicles than gas-powered ones on the road. At the same time, the country is western Europe's largest oil and gas producer, with a total output of over four million barrels of oil equivalents per day. 

While the country aims to be carbon neutral by 2030, Norwegian oil and gas investments are expected to hit a record high this year and will remain strong in 2025. 

This week, host Jason Bordoff talks with Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre in a live event recorded at the Columbia World Leaders Forum in New York during Climate Week. 

They discussed Norway’s progress toward becoming a green energy hub in Northern Europe and spoke about the obstacles the country faces in its pursuit of a green and secure energy future. Columbia students then joined the conversation, asking  questions about everything from Norway’s role in the global energy transition to insights the country could offer the rest of the world.

Back in 2012, the Department of Defense issued a first-of-its-kind “Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap.” It was designed to prepare the U.S. military for increasing threats to national security in the form of rising sea levels, increasing global temperatures, and growing conflicts over basic resources like food and water. It stated that “Climate change is expected to play a significant role in the DOD’s ability to fulfill its mission in the future.”

Fast-forward to today, and Sherri Goodman says the DOD now sees combating climate change as central to its mission.   

Sherri was appointed the first-ever deputy undersecretary of defense focusing on environmental security. One of her first assignments was cleaning up nuclear weapons development and production sites. And in 1998, she helped develop the military’s first climate change plan, focused mainly on reducing emissions.

This week, host Bill Loveless talks with Sherri about her latest book, “Threat Multiplier: Climate, Military Leadership, and the Fight for Global Security.” Sherri explains how far the military’s approach to climate change has come over the past 25 years. 

Sherri is secretary general of the International Military Council on Climate and Security and a senior fellow at the Wilson Center. She’s also founder and former executive director of the Center for Naval Analyses Military Advisory Board and is board chair of the Council on Strategic Risks, which includes the Center for Climate and Security.

It’s no secret that Republicans and Democrats don’t see eye to eye on climate change. 

According to a Pew Research Survey conducted earlier this year, just 12% of Republicans and Republican-leaners think climate change should be a top priority for the president and Congress. Meanwhile, the official 2024 Democratic party platform states there’s “nothing more important than addressing the climate crisis."

Energy and environmental law professor David Spence says today’s news and social media are partly responsible for the divide. 

In his new book, “Climate of Contempt: How to Rescue the U.S. Energy Transition from Voter Partisanship,” David argues it’s all but impossible for the government to take significant action to address global warming in a media environment focused on persuading more than educating. 

This week host Bill Loveless talks with David about his book and his perspective on the ideological polarization and negative partisanship that’s been building in the U.S. in the past 10-15 years. And how he believes getting us all offline and engaging with each other in person can help push regulatory politics forward.

David is the Rex G. Baker Chair in Natural Resources Law in the School of Law at the University of Texas at Austin. He’s also a professor of business, government, and society in the McCombs School of Business at UT Austin, where he teaches courses in energy and environmental regulation. And he’s co-author of a leading casebook “Energy, Economics, and the Environment.”

Thanks to the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act, the Department of Energy has been flush with cash for the past couple of years. Between the two measures, the DOE now has nearly $100 billion to put toward clean energy and grid development projects around the country through funding and loans.

There’s an expectation that these contributions will drive private investment—and they have been. This July, the DOE reported nearly $50 billion in funding awards already, with more than $60 billion in private investments matching federal dollars.

This week, host Bill Loveless talks with David Crane about where these funds have been going and what effects they’re having on clean energy applications around the country. They also discuss how the DOE is addressing nationwide energy challenges like transmission line permitting, storage, and other hurdles to decarbonization.

David is the under-secretary for infrastructure at the Department of Energy. He previously served as director of DOE’s Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations. He was also CEO of Climate Real Impact Solutions, as well as NRG Energy.