r nuclear energy has officially ended. Does that even sound possible? The debate over nuclear energy, it just ended. So Jennifer Granholm, who's the Secretary of Energy, right, she just gave a big speech and made it as clear as you could possibly make it. Climate change is an emergency. This is her framing. And you can't handle it without nuclear. And that nuclear energy is now safer and the new technologies are safe compared to other things. And you don't need fusion for this. Fusion would be great but it's not necessary in this model.

Now here's the weird part of the story. I don't know if you remember how much I was trying to get the Trump administration to say as strongly as Jennifer Granholm did that nuclear power has to be in the future. It has to be a big part of the future. And the Trump administration was always pro-nuclear and they did a lot of pro-nuclear things in terms of setting up test sites for nuclear technologies, etc. So they acted right, the Trump administration. But they didn't really make a big deal about it. Trump himself hardly ever mentioned it and certainly never made a big point of it. It was usually just sort of mentioned in a list.

But imagine if you will that Trump had been pro-nuclear like a big deal, as much as he was build the wall. Imagine if Trump had been nuclear, nuclear, nuclear, you got to build some nuclear. That would have made it impossible for Democrats to do it, wouldn't it? It would be like the wall. The Democrats can't accept a wall even though they want one because it was Trump's wall. Am I right?

Don't you think there are a lot of Democrats who'd kind of like to have a wall now? Not so much that they stop everybody from coming in but at least we have the option of regulating it the way we want to regulate it, not the way some entity wants to regulate it.

So I feel as if we got to this complete agreement. And I'm going to say complete agreement meaning that Democrats and Republicans are both strongly pro-nuclear now, at least at the higher levels. So I'll call that the agreement. There's obviously citizens will take a while to catch up. But this is amazing. And I don't think it would have happened if Trump had been way, way, way more pro-nuclear. I think the only way this could happen is that Trump was kind of quiet about it. Because it's not that polarized and it could have been.

So here's my question to you. How did this happen? What happened? What happened in the last say five years that made nuclear energy go from a highly polarizing topic to complete agreement? What happened? What do you think happened?

I'm just looking at your comments. Shellenberger, right. I think that's what happened. I think Michael Shellenberger is a big part of the story but we'll never know how much.

So let me complete the pieces here. So many of you know that Mark Schneider was a big advocate of nuclear, worked in the industry, still works in the industry I think. And he taught me everything I know. And I would talk continuously about nuclear needing to be a bigger deal.

Now also Michael Shellenberger who's written books on the topic and he's testified to Congress twice I think, at least twice. And if you haven't heard the Michael Shellenberger presentations on all this green energy stuff and nuclear you really have to because he's got the whole package, right? He's got the whole persuasion package. And I think he sold it to Congress. I mean they called him in for that purpose to find out what's what.

Now I see you mentioning Bjørn Lomborg and he would be the other biggest name that I can think of in the same category. But I don't know if he testified. Did he ever testify to Congress? Because he's not American. I don't know if he did. I doubt it.