In today’s episode of Dave Talks Politics:
- US Energy Moonshot: Catch China?
- 1,040 Units/Year – Realistic or Pipe Dream?
If you’re new to the channel, hey, take a moment, subscribe to the channel, then hit the bell to be alerted about new episodes when they drop.
1. **David Friedberg’s All-In Rant – The Wake-Up Call**
- From All-In Podcast Episode 229 (May 2025), David Friedberg lays it out: Energy is the critical linchpin for everything—AI, biotech, chips, automation, EVs, and the entire abundance story. Without massive new electricity, all those breakthroughs collapse.
- The US is so far behind China that it’s not even close—China is already at ~3,500 units installed capacity and adding 400–500 units annually. The US sits at ~1,300 units with only ~50 units added per year.
- China’s industrial power costs ~$0.06–0.08/kWh; US costs are ~$0.08–0.10/kWh and climbing. That gap compounds fast when you’re powering AI data centers, biotech labs, chip fabs, and EV factories.
- Friedberg calls for a Manhattan Project-scale effort: the US must add 1,000 units of generation capacity per year to stay competitive—otherwise we risk losing the future of technology and manufacturing to China.
- (Note: We’re using “unit” to mean 1 GW—a common measure for large power generators, like a single reactor at Palo Verde Nuclear Plant in Arizona, which is ~1.3 units and covers 4,000 acres, or Vogtle Unit 3 in Georgia, a 1.1-unit reactor that’s part of a $30B+ expansion.)
2. **The Scale Required – What It Actually Takes**
- To surpass China by 500 units in 2031 (assuming China maintains 500 units/year growth to reach ~6,000 units), the US must add ~5,200 units over five years (~1,040 units/year starting from 1,300 units).
- Average build cost ~$1.5 billion per unit → annual capex ~$1.56 trillion (~7% of current US GDP).
- 1,000 units is enormous: roughly equivalent to building 1,000 nuclear plants the size of Palo Verde (1.3 units each), or ~10× the entire current US nuclear fleet (~95 units).
- Transmission upgrades add 20–30% more capex; steel & concrete demand would be staggering—think hundreds of millions of tons annually, rivaling major infrastructure eras (Interstate Highway, WWII mobilization).
3. **Jobs, Materials, and Economic Lift**
- Generation + transmission buildout could create 1–2 million direct construction/manufacturing jobs per year (ironworkers, electricians, welders, engineers) plus millions more indirect (steel mills, concrete plants, suppliers).
- Pulling 2 million specialized workers could spike trade wages 10–20% due to shortages—great for those workers, but inflationary for overall costs.
- Steel demand ~50–100 million tons/year; concrete hundreds of millions of cubic yards annually—US mills at ~80% capacity, so heavy reliance on imports (China dominates 50% global steel). Domestic ramp-up takes 5–10 years, meaning short-term dependence on China for components/refined materials.
4. **Policy Levers & Trump EOs – Making It Possible**
- Trump’s key EOs: EO 14154 “Unleashing American Energy” (Jan 2025) revoked drilling pauses and fast-tracked federal permits; additional orders targeted state overreach and expanded tax credits for nuclear/solar/gas.
- Needed changes: Slash NEPA/NRC approval times from 2–5 years to 6–12 months; expand IRA-style tax credits; streamline interstate transmission via federal eminent domain; incentivize modular small reactors (SMRs) that build in 3–5 years vs. 7–10 for traditional nuclear.
- Private/foreign capital incentives: tariff revenue earmarked for infrastructure, regulatory certainty for hyperscalers (xAI, Google, Meta already spending $100B+), and USMCA nearshoring for Canadian hydro and Mexican solar.
- Probability of success: Low-to-moderate (20–40%) under current rules due to permitting lags and political gridlock. With aggressive reforms + bipartisan buy-in (jobs argument), rises to 50–60% chance of hitting 300–500 units/year—enough to narrow the gap significantly.
5. **Cross-Border & Geopolitical Edge – Can the West Win?**
- Existing networks: US-Canada grid (160,000 km interconnected lines, ~60 TWh hydro exports/year); Mexico-US ties (ERCOT/California links) could add 50–100 units capacity via upgrades.
- NSS/Western Hemisphere focus enables nearshoring of supply chains and power imports—avoids Russia-China dependency (Power of Siberia line already at 3 units).
- Meanwhile in Europe: Recent EU gas policy changes have made it effectively illegal to import cheap Russian energy—market gas prices spiked dramatically as a result (Dutch TTF benchmark rose ~30–50% in the weeks following key votes and restrictions in late 2025/early 2026).
- Victory path: Combine domestic buildout with hemispheric alliances, deregulation, and private capital flood—turns energy into a middle-class job engine and geopolitical strength.
OK team, so what does all this mean? David Friedberg’s wake-up call is spot on: the US must add ~1,040 units/year (~$1.56T capex, 7% GDP) to outpace China’s 500 units/year growth, or risk higher bills, blackouts, and lost jobs in AI/EV/manufacturing.
- The Elon Musk xAI story shows ingenuity: When utilities said powering his Memphis AI data center was impossible (years of delays), Musk brought in hundreds of gas generators to get it online fast. Not scalable nationally (high costs/emissions), but Musk has pushed solar (Tesla panels/batteries) and nuclear (tweets calling it “safe & needed for baseload,” supporting SMRs).
- Labor market strain: Pulling 2 million specialized workers could spike trade wages 10–20%—great for workers, but inflationary for construction costs.
- Materials sourcing: Steel/concrete needs domestic ramp-up (5–10 years lead time) + imports from allies (Canada, EU, Japan). China dominates 50% global steel—short-term dependence means trade stability or targeted waivers to avoid price spikes.
- Immigration needs: Likely 500,000–1 million skilled trades immigrants over 5 years (visas for welders/engineers) to fill gaps, or face delays—policy could tie to H-1B/USMCA labor flows.
- Overall upside: Moonshot creates jobs bonanza, but without smart policies, risks labor wars, higher prices, and China reliance—America First must include workforce and ally buildout.
Now lets do 3 questions with dave:
1. 7% GDP capex feels unsustainable—can permitting reform and tax incentives make the US energy moonshot realistic for job creation?
2. Trump’s EOs are moving—do they provide enough regulatory certainty to attract the private/foreign capital needed to close the gap with China?
3. With NRC/NEPA lags making 1,000 units/year nearly impossible, can cross-border hydro/solar from Canada and Mexico bridge the shortfall and help the West win?
**Final Hope Note**
Look, this is a tough challenge—but America has done impossible things before: the Manhattan Project, the Interstate Highway System, the Apollo moon landing. If we treat energy like the national security priority it is, rally the private sector, fix the permitting mess, and bring in allies like Canada, Mexico, and Japan, we can build the grid of the future. The reward? Cheaper power for your family, millions of good-paying jobs, and the US leading the AI and tech revolution—not watching from the sidelines. We’ve got the talent, the land, the innovation. Now we just need the will. Let’s make it happen.
**Clip & Source Links (for Editor / Substack – Bottom of Notes):**
- David Friedberg All-In rant excerpt
- Trump EO “Unleashing American Energy” signing
- Bessent Davos energy comments
- Elon Musk on AI energy needs
- FRED electricity generation capacity data
- EIA & IEA reports on China/US capacity additions
- Palo Verde tour video:
- Vogtle Unit 3 video:
- EU Parliament gas policy debate/clapping reaction:
(example clip from recent session showing parliamentary approval moments)
- Vogtle Unit 3 video:
