Today, the Arc of Outrage series turns to the forgotten stakeholder in energy infrastructure projects: the future. Evoking the future offers your best bridge to solutions with today’s skeptical communities.

What you’ll get in this solo episode of Energy Thinks

Your next infrastructure project has a stakeholder who will never attend a public hearing: the future.

I have argued that the future has the right of way—and that choosing not to build carries costs of its own. In this episode, I take on a difficult, practical question: How do you represent the future in your engagement with communities without simply invoking it as just another argument for your project?

This practical decision—how to invoke the future—matters because the right answer represents the best hope you have to dampen the Arc of Outrage and get to yes with communities. Listen to the episode to learn how.

Both of these things are true:

* Communities are demanding agency over what gets built around them.

* The community members in the room today are not necessarily thinking about what future generations require of them.

Four questions to ask yourself before you bring a project to a community

Who represents the future? What would make this a community its children will want to come home to?

What does a good future include? You are not entitled to a place in a community’s future simply because your project produces something the country needs.

When should the future conversation happen? What matters here? What future does this community already imagine? Could this project contribute to it—or what would have to change for it to do so?

How do you discuss the cost of not building without making a threat? If the community’s future looks better without this project, this project is not adequately compelling.

Bonus content for this episode

My latest book: The Myth and The Moment

More from my recent Arc of Outrage series:

* “The Arc of Outrage Has Come for Data Centers”

* “Stop Calling It Data Center Misinformation”

* “We Are Nowhere Near Peak Data Center Outrage”

* “The Data Center Arc Isn’t Fracking. It’s Worse.”

* “The Future Has the Right of Way”

* “Everything We Do Is Making it Worse”

Recent podcasts:

* “The Ride You Can’t Get Off”

* “Persuasion Won’t Shorten the Arc of Outrage” with Lee Beck

* “Boardwalk’s Scott Hallam on Lessons from a Past Arc of Outrage”

* “The Cost of a No-Build Future”

Watch on YouTube or listen on Substack.

Get started!

→ Need support navigating the Arc of Outrage? Reach out to schedule a briefing.

→ If this episode resonated with you, please review Energy Thinks wherever you listen.

→ New here? Subscribe here to receive Both of These Things are True each week.

Heart the forgotten stakeholder below!

To the future,

Tisha

Get full access to Both of These Things Are True at tishaschuller.substack.com/subscribe

Today, the Arc of Outrage series asks the uncomfortable question: If we demand that energy infrastructure proponents account for the future that they would build, shouldn’t energy infrastructure opponents also account for the future that would result from not building?

What you’ll get in this solo episode of Energy Thinks

When it comes to energy and the future, there is no do-nothing option. Doing nothing is, in fact, doing something—and that something needs to be called out.

It’s nonnegotiable: The future has the right of way. So no, energy infrastructure companies cannot impose their preferred future on communities. But neither can communities and opponents pretend that stopping energy infrastructure projects preserves the status quo.

Choosing not to build also chooses a future—with costs and trade-offs. Without building, today’s status quo becomes tomorrow’s stagnation. The more I work through this series, the more convinced I am that all parties are often forgetting our most important stakeholder: the future.

If we’re serious about building the systems of the future, we must engage communities in shaping the future they want to create.

Both of these things are true:

* Project proponents must answer: What future are you asking this community to accept?

* Project opponents must answer: What future are you creating for your community if this project does not happen?

Today’s outrage is understandable—and predicted by the Arc of Outrage. However, as energy infrastructure leaders, we must expect more of our civic leaders and elected officials than outrage served up in the forms of moratoria and projects denied. A responsible “no” must be paired with a feasible alternative and an honest accounting of its consequences.

A few key ideas from the episode

On what the future requires: “The future as a stakeholder is what is going to happen where I live. It means my kids want to come home ... That future requires environmental stewardship. It requires economic stewardship. And it absolutely demands a certain amount of opportunity and growth.”

The alternative to “no”: “Be thinking about the future as a stakeholder. Engage with your communities in a way that helps facilitate a conversation about what they want to create, and then be willing to change your project. Ultimately, it’s going to be community leaders that have to defend your project, and so it’s going to have to be awesome!”

Bonus content for this episode

My latest book: The Myth and The Moment

More from my recent Arc of Outrage series:

* The Arc of Outrage Has Come for Data Centers

* Stop Calling It Data Center Misinformation

* We Are Nowhere Near Peak Data Center Outrage

* The Data Center Arc Isn’t Fracking. It’s Worse.

Recent podcasts:

* “Persuasion Won’t Shorten the Arc of Outrage” with Lee Beck

* “The Ride You Can’t Get Off”

* “Boardwalk’s Scott Hallam on Lessons from a Past Arc of Outrage”

Watch on YouTube or listen on Substack.

What to do next in The Moment

* Need help navigating the Arc of Outrage? Reach out to request a briefing.

* If you enjoyed this episode, I’d appreciate it if you took a moment to leave Energy Thinks a five-star rating wherever you listen to podcasts.

* And if this newsletter was forwarded to you, subscribe here.

Create the future: Hit the heart button below!

The future has the right of way. See you there,

Tisha

Get full access to Both of These Things Are True at tishaschuller.substack.com/subscribe

What you’ll get in this episode of Energy Thinks

The future requires massive infrastructure build-out. But communities have made it clear: They will not accept infrastructure that feels imposed.

That tension in a nutshell—aka Both of These Things Are True:

* We need to build.

* People need agency over what gets built around them.

You know I’ve been writing about the Arc of Outrage: the predictable cycle of public opposition that comes for major infrastructure projects. Right now, the Arc is rising around data centers. But data centers are not the only infrastructure at issue; all infrastructure is entering a new era of scrutiny.

Earlier arcs teach us this crucial lesson: We can’t avoid the outrage, but we can move through the cycle without making it worse. Key insight: Outrage gets enflamed when people believe that decisions have already been made and the public process is performative.

You will encounter outrage. How will you lead through it?

That’s why you should listen to Scott Hallam, president and CEO of Boardwalk Pipelines, on this episode of Energy Thinks. Scott talks about what the pipeline industry learned from its own, earlier Arc of Outrage—and how he’s applying those lessons as he leads one of the companies building the energy future.

Why Scott Hallam?

Because Scott and Boardwalk are working on one of the most important questions in energy right now: How do you build for a generational increase in demand while earning public confidence in a moment of skyrocketing skepticism?

Boardwalk’s Borealis Project is designed to expand access to Marcellus and Utica natural gas supplies and deliver more energy to markets across Kentucky, Indiana, Tennessee, Florida, and the regions in between. Scott says this expansion is part of a broader generational opportunity: onshoring, electrification, data centers, power generation, and the need for affordable, accessible, secure energy.

But Scott does not separate the market opportunity from the human-centered challenges. He has lived through the pipeline battles; he knows how communities react when they feel ignored, managed, or overrun. And he is clear that the industry is better than it used to be, but not yet as good as it needs to be.

As Scott told me, “People want to be part of this process. They don’t want the process to be inflicted upon them.” Communities are not only asking whether a project is safe or economically beneficial. They are asking whether they have any meaningful agency over the future arriving around them.

Scott said something else that you—the energy infrastructure leader—must wrestle with: “I don’t think we could go into a community with any degree of authenticity and the belief that it’s going to happen the way that we envision it without change.”

This is not a concession; it is a leadership posture—one well suited to softening, shortening, and ultimately surviving the Arc of Outrage.

Some of Scott’s insights:

On why opposition isn’t—at its heart—political: “When I’m in a community, I don’t feel like it’s a political issue as much as it is a human issue. When I’m in a community and we’re talking about pipeline projects, and we face concern, even opposition, it’s because people care about their families, they care about their communities, they care about their property. They are very engaged, and I see that as a positive sign.”

How to build real trust: “There’s never a one-size-fits-all approach. Trust is the key ingredient, and to start with trust, we have to understand what’s important to communities. … We want communities to be just as passionate about our projects as we are.”

On the generational opportunity for energy: “We’re in a generational time when it comes to energy and energy infrastructure. … We want to make sure the way we address the market, communities, and landowners matches the moment.”

Bonus content!

More about Scott: Scott joined Boardwalk in 2023, bringing more than 20 years of experience across the upstream, midstream, and downstream natural gas industry. He also serves on the boards of the Southern Gas Association, the United Way of Greater Houston, and the Santiago Partnership.

Watch the episode on YouTube or listen to the podcast on Substack.

More from my Arc of Outrage series: “The Data Center Arc Isn’t Fracking. It’s Worse.,” “We Are Nowhere Near Peak Data Center Outrage,” “The Arc of Outrage Has Come for Data Centers” and “Stop Calling It Data Center Misinformation”

My recent podcast episodes “Persuasion Won’t Shorten the Arc of Outrage” with Lee Beck, “The Ride You Can’t Get Off,” “What You Don’t Know About Community Buy-In” with Jonathan Smith, and “Jim Kerr on Your Generational Opportunity”

Order your copy of The Myth and The Moment: From Polarization to Progress in the New Energy Landscape.

What to do next in The Moment

* Enjoying The Myth and The Moment? Leave a review to help more leaders find it.

* If this email was forwarded to you, please subscribe here.

* Forward this newsletter to someone responsible for building infrastructure and therefore navigating public opposition.

* Need to prepare your organization for the Arc of Outrage? Reach out to schedule a leadership briefing.

Please heart and share this post!

To building with communities, not in them,

Tisha

Get full access to Both of These Things Are True at tishaschuller.substack.com/subscribe

What you’ll get in this episode of Energy Thinks

My most important conversations right now are focused on the Arc of Outrage—and what it takes to lead your company through the Arc when opposition to your projects is no longer theoretical. Last week’s Both True explored the Arc: why data center outrage is still climbing, why the worst is likely ahead, and why leaders need to staff for the Arc they are actually in—not the one they hoped for.

This conversation with Lee Beck, chief global policy officer at HIF Global, picks up from there. In this episode, I sit down with Lee to talk about what it takes to make progress in a world that increasingly rewards outrage.

Why Lee Beck?

Whenever I see Lee at a conference, I grab the seat next to her.

Partly because she’ll inevitably raise her hand and ask an insightful and provocative question. Mostly because we will have the kind of wide-ranging conversation you will hear in this episode.

Lee challenges us to reframe the way we understand the political polarization of energy. Why is energy so incendiary? Because of the issues, values, and meaning we’re now attaching to it: identity, fairness, who pays, who benefits, and who decides. She connects the global energy debates to the local infrastructure fights so central to the Arc of Outrage. Affordability, security, AI, and local control—these topics get bundled together, and the bundle raises the emotional temperature fast.

If we can’t avoid outrage, how do we mitigate it? If communities are being asked to host the infrastructure that powers the future, what do they deserve in return? Lee has wise counsel on that, too.

Some of Lee’s insights:

On building trust with communities: “These interpersonal skills and emotional intelligence matter more than throwing another ad campaign at people: hearing to understand, not just to respond, and moving from persuasion to participation.”

On why the deal has to get better: “How do we sweeten the deal for the communities to host these? There is a lot more participatory capitalism, where communities get a say in how it gets built, potentially equity shares, support for local taxation. There is a lot that can be done in addition to the relationship layer.”

On the momentum of the Arc: “We’ve seen a lot of what I like to say is political agenda hitchhiking. We’re attaching more and more issues to the energy debate and also the climate discussion. That has led to a politicization where energy and climate are now politically divisive issues.”

Bonus content!

More about Lee: Prior to her role as chief global policy officer at HIF Global, Lee held leadership roles at Clean Air Task Force, and the Global CCS Institute, and worked across carbon capture, hydrogen, synthetic fuels, industrial policy, and pragmatic approaches to energy transition and decarbonization. She is currently a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council Global Energy Center, and serves on the Advisory Boards of Project Tempo and EPG Romania.

Watch the episode on YouTube or listen to the podcast on Substack.

More from my Arc of Outrage series: “The Arc of Outrage Has Come for Data Centers” and “Stop Calling It Data Center Misinformation.”

My recent podcast episodes “The Ride You Can’t Get Off,” “What You Don’t Know About Community Buy-In” with Jonathan Smith, “Jim Kerr on Your Generational Opportunity,” and “Energy Abundance Is Non-Negotiable. Responsibility Is, Too.”

Jason Bordoff’s recent Wall Street Journal article, “The Winners and Losers of Oil’s New World Order.”

Order your copy of The Myth and The Moment: From Polarization to Progress in the New Energy Landscape.

What to do next in The Moment

* Enjoying The Myth and The Moment? Leave a review to help others find it.

* If this email was forwarded to you, please subscribe here.

* Need to develop your Arc of Outrage strategy? Reach out for a briefing.

If you’re enjoying the Arc of Outrage series, leave a heart on this piece.

To participation over persuasion,

Tisha

Get full access to Both of These Things Are True at tishaschuller.substack.com/subscribe

This solo pod continues the series on the Arc of Outrage, the predictable and unavoidable opposition cycle that data centers are facing.

What you’ll get in this solo episode of Energy Thinks

The energy industry has been here before.

I warned data center proponents to stop calling the opposition they are facing “misinformation.” The problem is that data centers are now on the Arc of Outrage. I watched this happen during the fracking wars, when isolated local concerns became organized opposition and organized opposition became a national movement. The specifics change, but the pattern is familiar. The Arc for data centers is particularly steep because they are evoking a basket of concerns, all at once: energy affordability, grid reliability, AI writ large, local control, and the fear that too much is being built too fast.

This episode is not about avoiding the Arc. You cannot. It is about understanding where you are on it, what is coming next, and how to move through it with more skill.

In this solo episode, you’ll hear me think through:

* What the Arc of Outrage looks like: the Before Times, the phases, and what comes after

* Why the Arc cannot be avoided, even by good companies with good projects

* Why your job is to flatten the Arc (not avoid it)

* Why the winners will be the companies that get real early

Here’s a taste of what you’ll get:

On skipping the Arc: “You cannot avoid it. There is no skirting the arc of outrage. There is no off-ramp. This is not a lovely little freeway. This is the Disney ride you didn’t mean to get on that you cannot get off until it’s over.”

On whom data center developers need on their team: “If you can find a half dozen people who lived through the fracking wars, particularly in a blue jurisdiction, you are going to have a really good ally to help you get through this.”

On the actual job in front of companies: “Your job is to soften and shorten the Arc for your project and your company.”

On what leaders should expect: “Things are going to get a lot worse before they get better. But if you know that, you can manage it. Set realistic expectations: with your leadership, with your investors, with your stakeholders, with your customers.”

Bonus content for this episode

My latest book: The Myth and The Moment

Earlier installments in this series: The Arc of Outrage Has Come for Data Centers and Stop Calling It Data Center Misinformation.

Two recent podcasts: “What You Don’t Know About Community Buy-In” with Jonathan Smith and “Jim Kerr on Your Generational Opportunity.”

Watch on YouTube or listen on Substack

What to do next in The Moment

Preparing for the Arc of Outrage? Reach out to request a briefing. Can you please take a moment to give Energy Thinks a five-star rating wherever you listen to your podcasts? If this was this forwarded to you, please subscribe here.

Hit the heart button below—it helps others find our work!

Keep your hands and feet inside the vehicle,

Tisha

Get full access to Both of These Things Are True at tishaschuller.substack.com/subscribe

What you’ll get in this episode of Energy Thinks

This week, I sit down with Jonathan Smith, founder and principal of Mobilis Works, an advisory practice to the Problem Solvers on policy innovation, economic competitiveness, and civic capacity, for one of the most thoughtful conversations I’ve had about what it actually takes to move from policy ideas to real-world implementation.

Jonathan has spent his career at the intersection of Congress, state government, economic development, workforce strategy, and coalition building. And this conversation gets into one of the questions I’ve been obsessing over lately: How do we help the Problem Solvers actually solve problems?

In this episode, we discuss:

* Why on-the-ground implementation is the most important part of the policy process

* How communities became stuck chasing grants instead of building long-term investment readiness

* What project developers, policymakers, and industry leaders misunderstand about community buy-in

* Why people support projects when they believe they are helping design their community’s future

* Why opposition is not a “facts” problem but an agency problem

Why Jonathan Smith?

Jonathan Smith has spent his career betwixt and between ambitious policy ideas and on-the-ground reality. He most recently led Michigan’s effort to help communities, workers and businesses adapt to changes in the auto and energy sectors.

What struck me most about Jonathan is that he doesn’t talk about this abstract space in abstract terms. He focuses on the mechanics of getting things done: building trust, developing local capacity, understanding trade-offs, and creating conditions where communities can shape their own future instead of simply reacting to someone else’s plans.

Some of Jonathan’s insights

On the key ingredient to successful policy implementation: “You have to be grounded in reality. This has to work for the people it’s supposed to work for. You can’t get bogged down in the ideology or the idealistic version of it. What matters is whether there’s real impact and real outcomes.”

On getting communities to yes: “All communities really have right now is the ability to say no. But if you give them the ability to design their own future, you will see a huge difference in the way these projects land. If we can build more proactivity at the community level, now the community is choosing what projects to bring in rather than the other way around.”

On the secret sauce to coalition building: “You can solve lots of different problems with a single solution. The key is asking: Am I actually solving your problem with this?”

On what the Problem Solver and project developer must understand: “Most people don’t have super-strong feelings about a lot of this policy stuff. What they care about is: Do they live in a community they feel safe in? Are they happy with their neighbors and their day-to-day lives? Do they have a job that doesn’t just provide a paycheck, but provides dignity and a sense of accomplishment? We have to think about policy from their point of view—because if people see it as prioritizing somebody else’s agenda over theirs, they don’t see themselves in it. You’re talking past people.”

Bonus content!

Watch the episode on YouTube or listen to the podcast on Substack.

My most recent Both True, “Arc of Outrage,” on why communities do not experience infrastructure fights as technical disputes alone.

My recent podcast episodes “Jim Kerr on Your Generational Opportunity,” “Energy Abundance Is Non-Negotiable. Responsibility Is, Too.,” and “Climate Plans Get Punched in the Face,” with California PUC Commissioner Matt Baker.

Order your copy of The Myth and The Moment: From Polarization to Progress in the New Energy Landscape.

What to do next in The Moment

* Enjoying The Myth and The Moment? Leave a review to help others find it.

* If this email was forwarded to you, please subscribe here.

To relationships forged in the fire,Tisha

Get full access to Both of These Things Are True at tishaschuller.substack.com/subscribe

What you’ll get in this episode of Energy Thinks

This week, I sit down with Jim Kerr, chairman, president, and CEO of Southern Company Gas, for a conversation about what happens when the realities of physics, economics, and historically high energy demand collide with The Myth of an Easy Energy Transition.

Jim would be humble and interesting while talking to a tree stump. But lucky for you, he is even more engaging with me. A few things you’ll hear us discuss:

* Why “the laws of physics and economics are undefeated” when it comes to our energy system

* The growing pressure on the natural gas and electric systems as demand rises

* How leaders can move beyond picking winners and losers in energy debates

* Why humility and honesty matter in conversations about energy and climate

We agree: Easy narratives about the energy transition are giving way to mature, nuanced conversations about trade-offs.

Why Jim Kerr?

Before leading Southern Company Gas, Jim served as a utility commissioner in North Carolina—which means he understands energy not just from the perspective of operations and infrastructure, but also from the perspective of public accountability. He argues for natural gas, reliability, and infrastructure investment while also acknowledging trade-offs, environmental concerns, and the importance of public trust. At a moment when so many conversations about energy devolve into ideological battles, Jim’s uncommon sense of leadership, stewardship, and service elevates the conversation.

Some of Jim’s insights:

On the iron laws and intellectual humility: “This is a business that is ultimately governed by the laws of physics and economics. ... We can wish that they were different, but they’re not going to change. The laws of physics and economics are undefeated. And I think if we will humble ourselves, engage, and listen to each other … we can avoid the certitude that ‘I know the answer, and my answer is unassailably the correct answer.’”

On what customers know about energy complexity: “Fundamentally, folks want an energy system that is as clean, as reliable, as affordable, and as safe as possible. But people also understand there’s a balance to those things—that there are trade-offs inherent in the system.”

Bring on the permitting reform! “The system that we were increasingly reliant on had really been underinvested in fundamentally. … There is no substitute for more fit-for-purpose infrastructure being built. So we need permitting reform.”

On why this moment matters: “I do think we’re at the dawn of a new day of abundance, not scarcity, multiple opportunities, not sort of certitude about … a silver bullet. … I think the next couple of decades are truly an opportunity that will be generational.”

Bonus content!

Bio: Jim Kerr is chairman, president, and CEO of Southern Company Gas, one of the nation’s largest natural gas utilities serving more than 4 million customers across the country. Before joining Southern Company in 2014, he served for eight years on the North Carolina Utilities Commission and was president of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners. Kerr previously practiced energy law and policy at McGuireWoods, where he focused on energy regulation, transactions, and infrastructure development. Today, he is a leading voice on energy reliability, natural gas–electric coordination, and the infrastructure needed to meet growing U.S. energy demand.

Watch the episode on YouTube or listen to the podcast on Substack to hear Jim and me discuss The Myth and The Moment.

National Petroleum Council’s Report Reliable Energy: Delivering on the Promise of Gas-Electric Coordination.

My recent podcast episodes “Don’t Take the Bait,” “Energy Abundance Is Non-Negotiable. Responsibility Is, Too.,” and “Climate Plans Get Punched in the Face,” with California PUC Commissioner Matt Baker.

Order your copy of The Myth and The Moment: From Polarization to Progress in the New Energy Landscape.

What to do next in The Moment

* Email us and we’ll help you with your physics homework.

* Enjoying The Myth and The Moment? Leave a review to help others find it.

* If this email was forwarded to you, please subscribe here.

To certitude with a splash of humility,Tisha

Get full access to Both of These Things Are True at tishaschuller.substack.com/subscribe

What you’ll get in this solo episode of Energy Thinks

In last week’s Both True, I wrote about a shift I’m watching closely: climate priorities being repackaged as affordability arguments. Affordability is now the governing political test on energy—and some decarbonization-first advocates are repositioning their programs as the key to energy affordability.

This week’s solo pod picks up the next, harder question: What do you—the oil and gas leader—do with this insight?

If your first move is to scoff and say, “That’s just climate masquerading as affordability,” you will be correct. But you are unlikely to be effective.

In this solo episode, I work through:

* Why being right is not the same thing as being effective

* What oil and gas leaders can and cannot credibly call out

* How to respond when affordability arguments skip over energy system complexity

* Why emotional discipline is a core leadership skill

* What political signals from California and Democratic presidential politics may tell us about where energy arguments are headed next

A preview

On the “first simple answer”: “A lot of what is climate masquerading as affordability is a sincere, first, simple solution. And we all need to be committed to working further on that topic to get to the actual, more nuanced answer.”

On why calling it out may not work: “If you say, ‘Oh, that’s just climate masquerading as affordability,’ everyone is just going to roll their eyes and look the other way.”

On what to do instead: “Let’s go up to 100,000 feet. Let’s look at a longer time scale. Let’s explore the question of affordability in a bigger physical context.”

On the real leadership test: “I do 100 percent believe in telling the truth. The subtle thing I want to emphasize here is: When, where, and how can we be effectively persuasive?”

Bonus content for this episode

My latest book, The Myth and The Moment.

My most recent Both True, “Is Climate Action ‘Energy Affordability?’”

Mentioned: Politico’s “Tom Steyer Is Running the Most Expensive Campaign in America. It Might Win Him the California Governorship, and “Tom Steyer’s Climate Pivot Signals New Playbook for Dems.”

Tell me what you think: “Doing Data Centers the Not-Dumb Way” Volts podcast with Jigar Shah.

Relevant podcasts of mine: “Climate Plans Get Punched in the Face” and “Energy Abundance Is Non-Negotiable. Responsibility Is, Too.”

Watch the episode on YouTube or listen to the podcast on Substack.

What to do next in The Moment?

* Want our help with your strategy? Email us to secure a contract spot for Q4 2026.

* Please give Energy Thinks a five-star rating wherever you listen to your podcasts.

* Was this email forwarded to you? Please subscribe here.

Hit the heart button below—it helps others find our work!

To effective truth-telling,

Tisha

Get full access to Both of These Things Are True at tishaschuller.substack.com/subscribe

Planning your 2026 leadership event? Order The Myth and The Moment for your team. (Reach out for bulk pricing.)

What you’ll get in this solo episode of Energy Thinks

Last week, I made the case that energy abundance is a civic good—and that oil and gas remain central to achieving it. This solo pod explores some of the consequences of that argument: What does energy abundance as a civic good require of industry? What does it ask of the Problem Solvers? And who decides what comes next?

In this solo episode, I work through:

* What follows from the civic case for energy abundance and the five truths that underpin it

* Why “We’re essential” is not a sufficient case for oil and gas

* What a social contract might require of companies like yours operating at the center of modern life

* Why Problem Solvers matter more than perfect persuasion

* Why someone still has to make a coherent case for unmitigated natural gas (ASAP!)

A preview

Why a civic case for energy abundance matters: “This is particularly poignant right now, when we see the angst around permitting reform, around power systems’ build-out. The momentum is still on the side of anyone who wants to say no. The only way that calculus is going to change is when there’s a sense of ownership and buy-in and agency around these projects at each community level. Or the nays will always win.”

On the social contract: “If you’re doing something that is essential to the well-being of society, there is a social contract expected of the company: that you give more than you receive, that you are there when needed, that you make certain commitments.”

On problem solvers and confidence: “I don’t think there is a way to say ‘The Myth is dead’ that people living in The Myth of an Easy Energy Transition can hear. The conclusion I’ve come to is that Problem Solvers must have the confidence to say ‘This is right’ and be willing to take the critique.”

Plus: Someone needs to make the case for natural gas. Is that you?!

Bonus content for this episode

My latest book, The Myth and The Moment.

The civic case for energy abundance: Being Essential Isn’t Enough.

Matt Yglesias’ piece “Republican War-Mongering Is Their Worst Economic Policy.”

Relevant podcasts: “Climate Plans Get Punched in the Face” and “The World Changed. The Climate Playbook Didn’t.”

Watch the episode on YouTube or listen to the podcast on Substack.

What to do next in The Moment

* We can help your busy team work more strategically. Email us to secure a contract spot for Q3 2026.

* Please take a moment to give Energy Thinks a five-star rating wherever you listen to your podcasts.

* Was this email forwarded to you? Please subscribe here.

* If this landed for you, hit the heart button below.

To building the social contract,

Tisha

Get full access to Both of These Things Are True at tishaschuller.substack.com/subscribe

What you’ll get in this episode of Energy Thinks

My most important conversations right now are focused on The Problem Solvers—those civic leaders squeezed between the climate ambition of their constituents and energy reality. In this episode, I sit down with Matt Baker, Commissioner at the California Public Utilities Commission, to talk about what Problem Solver leadership looks like on the front lines of climate ambition: California.

In few places have The Myth of an Easy Energy Transition faced The Moment more clearly than in California. This conversation is important to you for a few reasons:

* Matt’s the best kind of Problem Solver—a smart, devoted, pragmatic, experienced climate hawk willing to name trade-offs and argue for workable solutions.

* He’s in the middle of the action. He sits at the center of some of the hardest questions in energy right now: what to build, how fast to build it, and who can afford the bill.

* He thinks differently than we do. And (as you’ll hear) his view of the world—what matters, what is possible, what is urgent—is very different from yours. You need that diversity of thought.

How does Matt address the yawning gap between the climate expectations of his constituencies and the on-the-ground pressures around cost and reliability? “I’m thinking of that quip from Mike Tyson’s,” he told me, “which is ‘All plans are great until you get punched in the face.’”

For a long time, he added, regulators like him operated under an implicit plan for the energy transition: First drive efficiency, then decarbonize power sources, then electrify everything else. But now that punch Tyson was talking about has arrived in California, in the form of rising costs, reliability stressors, and wildfire liabilities.

What makes Baker worth hearing is his unflinching commitment to the centrality and urgency of climate ambition to the state’s goals and his mandate. He argues that reliability and affordability are the necessary conditions for climate action.

You need to understand this point of view.

Why Matt Baker?

I met Matt when I was head of the Colorado Oil & Gas Association and he was a Colorado public utilities commissioner. He’s someone I’ve long known to be both a passionate climate hawk and a deeply pragmatic thinker.

Matt brings a perspective we don’t hear enough from: what it looks like to sit at the center of the regulatory beast, where every decision is a trade-off—and getting it wrong has real consequences for your neighbors. In his case, 39 million of them.

Some of Matt’s insights:

On climate ambition versus reality: “It’s super important as an energy regulator to recognize that if we can’t provide safe, reliable, and affordable energy services, then we will not be able to meet those climate goals. That prime directive—particularly reliability and affordability—has to go hand in hand if we’re going to meet [climate] goals.”

On climate progress: “We have to get used to living in difficult worlds and making trade-offs—but still moving the ball as far as we can every time we get it.”

The quiet part was said out loud: “I continue to believe natural gas is a critical fuel, and that California really needs to be able to think about how do we get clean firm [power]. And until we have clean firm [power sources] that are economical, we’re going to rely on natural gas.”

On depolarizing energy and climate: “This is not a religious war. ... This is not a crusade on either side. My goal is to make energy boring again! Let’s talk about cost allocation. Let’s talk about resource planning.”

Bonus content!

More about Matt Baker: Matt Baker is a commissioner at the California Public Utilities Commission, appointed by Governor Gavin Newsom in 2024. He brings decades of experience in energy and climate policy, including serving as director of the CPUC’s Public Advocates Office and deputy secretary of energy at the California Natural Resources Agency. Previously, he was a commissioner at the Colorado Public Utilities Commission and a program officer at the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. Baker began his career in public interest advocacy and holds a BA in history from Pennsylvania State University.

Watch the episode on YouTube or listen to the podcast on Substack to hear Josh and me discuss The Myth and The Moment.

Read Jennifer Pahlka’s Recoding America: Why Government Is Failing in the Digital Age and How We Can Do Better.

CPUC’s report to the California Earthquake Authority: Senate Bill 254 Information and Recommendations.

Order your copy of The Myth and The Moment: From Polarization to Progress in the New Energy Landscape.

What to do next in The Moment

* Email us and we’ll help you train for your next boxing match.

* Enjoying The Myth and The Moment? Leave a review to help others find it.

* If this email was forwarded to you, please subscribe here.

To rolling with the punches,Tisha

Get full access to Both of These Things Are True at tishaschuller.substack.com/subscribe