There is a particular historical irony in the timing. On the same day King Charles III ascends the throne, previously Europe’s most isolated from consequence – yet loudest voice in chasing the catastrophic climate change energy policies, the British government is forced to reverse course on years of energy regulations and restrictions.
Britain’s new Prime Minister Liz Truss announced, “a new round of oil and gas licensing will come next week with more than 100 licenses issued. A moratorium on fracking will be lifted and planning permission can be sought where there is local support,” in an urgent emergency effort to lower energy costs for British citizens.

The move comes in combination with a government plan to help citizens and businesses cope with skyrocketing prices for electricity and home heating fuel. The climate change chickens have come home to roost throughout Europe and the British government is urgently trying to head-off the calamitous consequences.
Inside the media announcements of the Truss plan, the biggest concern expressed is how the financial and multinational banking sector (the ESG investment groups) will respond to the government position. After decades of ideological “green” outlooks flowing into the energy industry, the biggest concern expressed in the financial analysis is how a reversal by such a large economic system will reverberate.
The climate change ideology has a stranglehold on the energy sector of the economy, this move by Great Britain would be the most significant push-back in decades. The minority green activists are apoplectic that they may lose control over the majority of opinion. The economics of a reversal in energy policy could reverberate throughout the western alliance, particularly in Europe. It will be interesting to see whether this shift in U.K. policy has ripple effects in the U.S.
On Sept 7, the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen held a press conference in Brussels, announcing five initiatives to contain the expensive EU energy crisis: “The goal is clear. We must cut the revenues of Russia that Putin uses to finance this atrocious war against Ukraine.” {
Absent of any desire to raise energy supply and/or energy production, monetary policy can support the goal of lowering energy use by driving down all economic activity.
Not only are U.S. taxpayers directly paying for the majority of costs in Ukraine, but we are also subsidizing the European Union by exporting LNG and driving up the price here at home.
Predictably 2023 is going to be the beginning of several ‘Build Back Better’ decades where the ownership of material things disappears. When your wages are focused on sustaining yourself with housing, food and energy, all of those other purchases become mere indulgences.
According to