Transcript
Bob McNally: Okay.
lpaltiguzman: Welcome to Energy Vista, a podcast on energy issues, personal and professional trajectories. A podcast where we make experts great again and contribute actively to the public debate on policymaking around commodities, geopolitics of energy and trade. I'm your host, Leslie Palti-Guzman. It's February 6th, 2026, and time for a new Energy Vista episode.
lpaltiguzman: Today, my guest is Bob McNally, founder and president of the Rapidin Energy Group, an energy market, policy, and geopolitical consulting firm.
lpaltiguzman: Bob is also the author of the award-winning book, Crude Volatility. And actually, I have a copy with me, dedicated, did it with a dedicate.
Bob McNally: Oh.
lpaltiguzman: So from 2001 to 2023, Bob also served as a special assistant to President George W. Bush and served in the White House National Economic and National Security Councils.
lpaltiguzman: I'm very happy to have you back, Bob, on the podcast. I think it's the second time. And for people who don't know, I worked also at the Rapid and Energy Group and worked with you. And you were my boss for a few years. And I'm very happy I had this experience because I grew enormously as an analyst. So welcome back, Bob.
Bob McNally: Leslie, thank you so much for having me back on your excellent podcast and greetings from London. And it's really great to be with you. There's a lot to talk about. And I can't think of a better place or person to go over things with than you. So thank you very much.
lpaltiguzman: Thank you. And you've been on the road, so I'm even more you know grateful that you make the time for this discussion. And so, you know, oil is still making the headlines. It remains a dominant source of global primary energy.
lpaltiguzman: um We watched the Venezuela operations, surgical operations from the US s military and the decision from the Trump administration to remove the autocrat, Nicolas Maduro.
lpaltiguzman: And following that, we heard a lot of statements about what it means for oil, ah and notably that um potentially the US combined with Venezuela could hold over 55% of the world's proven oil reserve.
lpaltiguzman: And since then, um we've seen that the US has started importing Venezuelan oil and also selling Venezuelan oil. So many things have been said and analyzed about but the motivation of removing Nicolas Maduro from power and bringing him to a gym in New York.
lpaltiguzman: But for you, like when it comes to the oil picture, do you think that what part of the motivation was this return of great power rivalry?
lpaltiguzman: And who is controlling oil, oil reserves, the trade flows, um also this competition between China and the US? Can you tell us a little bit where does it fit in in this oil landscape?
Bob McNally: Sure. Absolutely. Well, I think the first thing we should say is that you know presidents have issues that they want to deal with. They choose priorities.
Bob McNally: And then there issues or problems they are forced to deal with. They didn't choose it. Venezuela would be in the first category. President Trump, even in the first term, really wanted to bring Venezuela back into alignment with the U.S. And he's acting on it in the second term.
Bob McNally: And I think what we saw in Venezuela fits very well into this national security strategy that the president announced shortly before the Venezuela operation.
Bob McNally: And that boils down to saying, United States is not going to pull up stakes and abandon Europe and the Middle East and Asia, no. But we are going to prioritize this hemisphere.
Bob McNally: And we are going to prioritize ejecting adversaries that have not just, you know, it's not so much colonies anymore, but significant economic and military and strategic stakes.
lpaltiguzman: Like China. Yeah. and
Bob McNally: And Venezuela was the first example and the the biggest example. And so part of it is ejecting China and Russia and Iran from Venezuela.
Bob McNally: David And also, it is getting us companies back into the oil sector and it's also about immigration. David And and drugs and so forth, so there's a lot of things going on, but it's really the first major concrete and forceful application of what people call now the Don row doctrine right the.
lpaltiguzman: Yeah.
Bob McNally: And so now from an oil perspective, Leslie, I think it's pretty minor. um It's a bad day for Chinese refiners who are expecting to get cheap Venezuelan crude, right?
lpaltiguzman: Mm-hmm.
Bob McNally: It's bad for the Chinese government has lent so much money to China and that was repayment for that. It's good news for other complex refiners who are gonna have an opportunity to purchase those Venezuelan barrels, including US refiners, but not just us.
Bob McNally: But that's, in the grand scheme of things, not ah too big of a deal. The real question is, can Venezuela increase its production?
lpaltiguzman: Yeah.
Bob McNally: If so, how fast? And there, it's probably a matter of a few hundred thousand barrels a day in the coming years. Again, not ah in a hundred million barrel a day market, plus not a huge deal.
lpaltiguzman: Yeah.
Bob McNally: The real question is, in the twenty thirty s and beyond, can Venezuela go from one million barrels a day back to three to four million barrels a day? That's a fascinating question, but it's a question that we won't even begin to see resolved until well after the Trump administration is has left. And a lot of things have to change before that can happen.
lpaltiguzman: So where are we in the boom and bust cycle? and For you, like are we is there a perception of shortage of oil to power the AIS,
lpaltiguzman: the ai arrest the Yeah, the AI race for leadership is between China and the US s and, you know, all this power hungry industry that will require more energy, electricity and the sense of like the need the new need for energy security and who is going to control those resources. Like, do you do you see it as playing out also in Venezuela or not at all?
Bob McNally: You know, I think this and I've just been back. I was in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Kuwait until this morning, and I'll be here at in London for IE week. So lots of discussions with folks.
Bob McNally: I think you ask a great question. Where does all this sit in the cycles of oil? And we're going through a really interesting time, in my view. The oil market entered a bear cycle, low oil prices in late 2014, 2015.
Bob McNally: And we were starting to climb out of it when COVID hit and we had an exogenous black swan demand shock. Then we had the Russian invasion of Ukraine and oil prices spiked and that hurt demand.
Bob McNally: But if we look beyond these cyclical factors, the big change is happening that people are talking about everywhere. It's this narrative shift that for the fast last five or six years, the dominant narrative in the oil market and to some degree gas market has been that the world is on track for peak demand by 2030, which is very fast.
lpaltiguzman: Mm-hmm.
Bob McNally: And this was due to climate change policies and fuel efficiency gains and so forth. And this, everybody believed this and they invested that way. If you look around, oil discoveries are low, investment and spending on new discoveries is at a post-World War II low.
Bob McNally: ah We are not investing enough for a world in which demand for oil and gas continues to grow after 2030. We're investing for a world that's gonna see a peak. at least until recently, but that narrative is collapsing, Leslie. And you and I worked on this a lot when you were with us, and I know you think about these things. You come from Europe.
Bob McNally: um Around the world, climate change policies are weakening, from China to Europe to UK to Canada to the US. And the data don't show any collapse in OECD gasoline demand, for example, which we should be seeing if we're on track for a peak global liquids demand by 2030. And the political changes, you see this in Europe, certainly in the United States, are no longer prioritizing swift decarbonization, to put it lightly. Energy security, energy affordability are back.
Bob McNally: So when you stitch this all together, you have a a market, an investment community that has been duped into believing that oil is about to go the way of horses and buggies 120 years ago, about to die in terms of growth, to suddenly realizing we don't have enough in 2032 or 2035. This is where Venezuela becomes important. We may need that extra 2 million barrels a day, especially since decline rates are increasing, as the IEA has pointed out.
lpaltiguzman: Mm-hmm.
Bob McNally: And so when I was traveling around, what you see now is countries are starting to get excited about investment again. Kuwait just announced that they're going to invite companies to come in and try and increase their crude production.
Bob McNally: um I think they're looking at this in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait and UAE, certainly. So I think there's a sense that after this period of depression, if you will, about not only the current market, but where we're going, that suddenly we realize we are short.
Bob McNally: If shale is going to plateau, where is the oil going to come from? If world demand grows, yeah,
lpaltiguzman: but event
lpaltiguzman: yeah I was going to ask you about U.S. shale.
Bob McNally: Yeah.
lpaltiguzman: What does it say about the U.S. shale oil and gas reserves and the ability to continue to produce and reach global markets? Are you concerned that... So what does it mean to plateau?
lpaltiguzman: Does it doesnt mean that there is going to be a risk for lower exports in the medium term from U.S. shale oil and gas?
Bob McNally: I think we'll still be exporting a lot on the oil side, mainly because of quality issues.
lpaltiguzman: Thank you.
Bob McNally: We produce the shale as light sweet that tends to get exported. Our refiners tend to like medium and then heavier barrels. So and I think our consumption in the United States is not going to grow by gangbusters. Again, for the peak demand narrative, U.S. oil demand has to fall. Gasoline demand has to fall. That's not going to happen. But I think we're sort of steady. On gas, you know the concern I have, and this is you're you're the expert on on gas and LNG, but with this whole data center debate and high Henry Hub prices, I'm concerned that as you know that there we could see export restrictions down the road.
Bob McNally: Certainly, if the Democratic Party comes back and says, wow, we want to do what Donald Trump did. Donald Trump was very aggressive in his use of presidential powers. With a stroke of a pen, he can...
Bob McNally: tariff you can restrict exports and so forth so one could not rule out that a a new administration declares a climate emergency and restricts exports and if we have gas at eight or nine ten dollars per mmbtu and with the data centers building building and so forth People may say, you know what, we should block our exports of LNG and keep the gas here for homeowners, for businesses, for petrochemicals. So I think we may be testing America's political support for energy exports. Maybe not so much for oil, but certainly for gas in the years to come. So that's a big concern. I think if we limit our exports, it'll be because of above ground political risks, not economic ones.
lpaltiguzman: I mean, i think you know you hear this concern, this fear from Europe. um They have you know recently vented a lot their anxiety about the reliability of US LNG and the US as a trade partner.
lpaltiguzman: I think for gas supply and exports, you know there is a case to make that higher and rehab prices could actually trigger and production of dry gas from the US. Then it's another story whether it can reach markets or not and how fast.
lpaltiguzman: and But there is still plenty of an abundance gas supply in the US. And then for the data center, you know there is a lot of debate about ah productivity and whether it's overblown, this kind of demand for gas and how fast nuclear can be built or additional renewable and colocation of power and and those data center. And And so a lot of it, you know, it's um it's a fascinating unfolding ah story, but I think I'm more optimistic that actually this administration is very supportive in in statements and in action in actions.
lpaltiguzman: about unleashing a gas exports with accelerating the permitting process. um you know All the trade deals almost have a components of higher exports of gas abroad. So I think it's it's really part of the of the policy now.
lpaltiguzman: ah True that if Democrats come back to power, there would be a potential shall shift again towards more renewable and and trying to decarbonize the world and so on.
lpaltiguzman: But I think they may have also understood what happened you know in the past few years and and realized that you know for the Democrats, US s energy was also a part of the um helping allies in Europe with Ukraine.
Bob McNally: Right.
lpaltiguzman: And you know that's still part of the agenda, like how you can use it as a diplomatic tool. So you know it's it's a fascinating debate. and But I wanted to ask you also about the US shale gas.
Bob McNally: Right.
lpaltiguzman: So do you think that US shale oil and gas, so you know the US has been using it as as a tool, right?
lpaltiguzman: In diplomacy, in trade, where do you stand in the debate on whether the US is a reliable trade partner? Do you think we've we've seen a weaponization or we could see a weaponization of of oil?
Bob McNally: Well, when it comes to this administration and U.S. exports of energy, I think we're seen as a and we are acting as a reliable trade partner.
Bob McNally: We don't see President Trump doing what President Biden did and calling a pause for a pause on permitting of like liquefaction facilities, partly for climate change, partly for affordability issues, is what President Biden said.
Bob McNally: And so you you're safe there. Now, as we see with Canada, although the president decided to exempt energy from the Canadian tariffs, I think there's a little more concern there, but I think energy is probably safe, more or less. Where the administration is willing to use and and and exploit or leverage energy to perform policy, we see in Venezuela, in Iran, and with Russia. And we see that with what the administration did vis-a-vis Venezuela. We put a blockade in effect. We see with Iran, where we have sanctions and we're trying to tighten those, and we may see restrictions on Iranian exports. And then with Russia.
Bob McNally: We see sanctions on big Russian energy companies urging the Indians to take less Russian, and they've been reducing their imports, trying to get that euro spread wide. So we're certainly, the administration, when it comes to global trade for energy and energy exports by our adversaries, he's certainly willing to weaponize U.S. policy to to further our goals, definitely.
lpaltiguzman: You mentioned earlier, like the role of oil and gas companies and the growing role of the government also in trying to use them as a tool in diplomacy.
lpaltiguzman: And this is kind of what we saw also with Venezuela. had hu How do you think the US private companies ah react to to this kind of growing federal governmental involvement?
Bob McNally: Yeah, cautiously, cautiously, especially the big integrated companies. They don't like to get swept up into political agendas. Often they can be counterproductive and destroy capital.
lpaltiguzman: Mm-hmm.
Bob McNally: And even if they are momentarily beneficial, ah You know, ah politics in Washington is like the weather. If you don't like it, you wait a little while and it changes. And so, you know, I'm sure companies looking at Venezuela, for example, are concerned about whether a President Newsom or AOC or somebody would have their back if they jumped into Venezuela in 2029 and so forth. So if you're a company that's operating in a country, um I'm sure you, I think companies are thrilled that they have an administration that's supportive.
lpaltiguzman: Yeah, of course.
Bob McNally: Right. the So so that that there was an avoided cost. of ah They dodged a bullet in the last election and they're thrilled that they have an administration that is supportive of them in every way.
lpaltiguzman: and we mean for for no No oil and gas company wants to be in Europe right now, and they are moving out of Europe.
Bob McNally: it
lpaltiguzman: So, I mean, they are much more welcome in the US for sure.
Bob McNally: Right. Right. So. That's right. And so they love that.
lpaltiguzman: Yeah.
Bob McNally: But you know what? Three more years to go. And oil companies have a long memory and they have a long horizon for their investments. And they have to they make worry about making returns, as you know, in 2030, 2035, when the political situation could change enormously.
Bob McNally: So I think they're cautious about getting swept up into political agendas of the day.
lpaltiguzman: Yeah. um And at the same time, we see that they have to rival with state-owned entities and governments that have a much more aligned national energy strategies with their state-owned companies and, you know, to open new market or to, and we see that some of them are not shy of doing government to government deals.
Bob McNally: Yes.
lpaltiguzman: um Do you think we're back at the place where the US is wondering, well, how do we compete with those actors and and countries ourselves were more dispersed and don't have a single energy strategy with like one entity that follows the lines.
lpaltiguzman: And at the same time, it's the strength of the US to have like this diversity, and you know, capital driven companies, they did and it drives competition and new technologies and innovation. So it's and it's going to be interesting, I think.
Bob McNally: It will, but I think the companies are positive, even though they're up against, in some ways, national oil companies. The big cloud over them has been this idea that the end is near for oil and gas demand.
Bob McNally: And they were vilified. they were They were made to be kind of the enemy by the political system. They were seen as doing a bad thing for society, providing energy. And we were in a...
Bob McNally: soft phase in oil prices. They've been low, there's been oversupply, et cetera. So all of these conditions have been a huge cloud over the industry. I think that cloud is lifting and the political situations improving, the future is looking better as we discussed.
Bob McNally: And in that environment, I think the fiber companies are very confident that they can compete, that they have the capital, the expertise, even to work with the national oil companies. I mean, look, Kuwait has a national oil company.
lpaltiguzman: Thank
Bob McNally: But it's going to ask foreign companies to come in and with production sharing agreements, help them produce more because those private companies, they bring that skill, that capital, that flexibility.
Bob McNally: And so I see more partnerships with NOC countries in the reserves. And there's other areas. There's your Guyana's. There's your Argentina's. There's your offshore provinces where, you know, they have to compete. So I think.
Bob McNally: the the The future is brightening for oil and gas companies. These big clouds are lifting and I don't think they're too worried about having to operate in a in a market with their NOC brethren.
lpaltiguzman: Okay, great. So we cannot not talk about Iran.
Bob McNally: Okay.
lpaltiguzman: and There might be a strike. We don't know exactly what form, shape, timing. um Do you think it's another opportunity reconfigure at one point trade flow of oil and gas? And Iran has plenty of them.
lpaltiguzman: um How should we think about Iran and the different scenarios for the market?
Bob McNally: Well, i think I think Iran is a place where both for energy and for broader geopolitics,
lpaltiguzman: Yeah.
Bob McNally: it's going to get a lot worse, but then it's going to get a lot better. um This regime in Iran is not supported by its people. And it's, in my view, decaying.
Bob McNally: And it's isolated, and it's on the ropes, and it's only a matter of time before the Iranian people overthrow it.
lpaltiguzman: Mm-hmm.
Bob McNally: But between now and then, there is a very real risk of a regional conflict and a very disruptive one for energy.
lpaltiguzman: Mm-hmm.
Bob McNally: And that's something certainly that's going on right now. So we have, you know, at les Leslie, at Rapid, and we put odds and outcomes and things. And so we have a 75 percent probability that in the coming weeks there will be some sort of military action between the United States and Iran, possibly, likely Israel as well.
Bob McNally: Now, that doesn't necessarily mean a regional war where there's a massive disruption to Ras La Fan and Hormuz Floas and Abkei. It could be ah selective, minor, but we do think that there's not a deal space between this regime and the United States and Israel.
Bob McNally: We just don't see both parties having enough common ground and certainly a trust to come to a deal. And so things will probably have to get worse. I hope they don't.
Bob McNally: But um but they we i think we think the odds favor that they will. However, to your point, Iran has the most you know pro-American, pro-Western after Israel.
lpaltiguzman: I was going to say like...
Bob McNally: After Israel in the Middle East, it's Iran. and And as you mentioned, was it second or so largest gas reserves, oil, top five um infrastructure right there.
Bob McNally: And so when? Iran has a regime that is like its people and comes back into alignment with the world. Leslie, so many things get better. First of all, we'll get production.
Bob McNally: You talk about Venezuela. We can get a lot more oil sooner in Iran if they opened up to Western companies. In my view, it's not the heavy oil, the orinoco belts and all that.
lpaltiguzman: Yeah.
Bob McNally: It's it's it's it's complex and everything, but they've maintained their fields well. We could really see, I think, faster production oil and gas. You'd reduce you'd reduce geopolitical risk throughout the whole region.
Bob McNally: And bad news for Russia, you could probably extract, you could build pipelines and extract oil and gas from the stands, from other countries in Central Asia, through Iran, through the Gulf at lower geopolitical risk. So I can think of really, it's hard to imagine in my view,
Bob McNally: a more plausible and beneficial change in government than Iran's, where it in one stroke vastly improves the energy picture in the world, the geopolitical picture in the world, really. So i guess I try and keep myself optimistic about that, but very sanguine and very focused on, you know, the getting from here to there may be quite bumpy.
lpaltiguzman: Yeah. So over the summer, just before 12 days war, I was saying that it was, you know, potentially the best moment to attack the nuclear facilities.
lpaltiguzman: in Iran because the oil price were relatively low, you know. And here again, we are in the $60 per barrel. And all the worries over the summer about escalation and what it would do to the oil prices were proven wrong. I mean, it would be didn't last very long, the spike. Do you see a scenario where, again, this time, all the worries from the neighbors could be over, it could be exaggerated.
lpaltiguzman: and at the end of the day, Iran is not that strong anymore, has weakened a lot and the retaliations may not be, you know, as um horrific as anticipated and that the reaction to the oil markets would be actually not you know, won't last.
Bob McNally: slide.
Bob McNally: Right. Now, you're right. You know, since 2019, when attacked Abqaq, and we had the largest open increase in oil prices on the Sunday Asian Open ever.
Bob McNally: But it quickly reversed and Russia attacked Ukraine. Crude went from 80 to $120 quickly reversed. You mentioned June war spiked, reversed. President sanctioned Russia in October, spiked, reversed.
Bob McNally: um So the market has learned that and you know there can be geopolitical events, but if there's no sustained interruption in oil or gas flows, there's no sustained oil price spike. Now, with Iran, our odds are 75%. We will see military action.
Bob McNally: We're not that high that there will be a sustained major disruption of energy. That would be more in the 15, 20% category. But if that happens, it would be enormous.
Bob McNally: Iran's ability to damage Gulf energy production and restrict flows is greater than I think traders believe, especially after all these years of nothing happening, right?
Bob McNally: I remind people,
lpaltiguzman: yeah kind
Bob McNally: Right. Right.
lpaltiguzman: I remember in the past, like each time you know there were there is tensions with Iran, We hear, OK, if they close the threat of Hormuz, it will last only three days because then the US military will move in and they don't have the capacity to withhold that for much longer.
lpaltiguzman: Is that still the case?
Bob McNally: I think that's wrong.
lpaltiguzman: Oh.
Bob McNally: We've never believed that. We've done studies. ah We've done elaborate studies. We've worked with military officers, ah retired military officers who have helped us understand that. No, no, no. That that is a misconception.
Bob McNally: Just because the past military actions, first Gulf War, second Gulf War, praying mantis when the United States and Iran came to blows in the late 1980s and we sank a good chunk of their navy in an afternoon. The memory may be the U.S. winds overwhelmingly in hours to days.
Bob McNally: But no, military officers who have looked at this, British, American, that I know, they say this is different. Iran has the weaponry, the coastline, to be able to make Hormuz unsafe for commercial traffic for weeks, if not longer. Consider this, Leslie.
Bob McNally: Last April, the United States military spent 52 days pummeling the Houthis in Yemen.
lpaltiguzman: Yeah. Yeah. Mm-hmm.
Bob McNally: we failed to get them to open up the Babu Mandap. President Trump publicly congratulated the Houthis on their resilience.
lpaltiguzman: yeah
Bob McNally: We spent a billion dollars, a thousand munitions strike points. Iran has much better weaponry and much better terrain to operate from. So in my view, if Iran chose to contest with the US the Hormuz Strait.
Bob McNally: And if it chose to go back and attack major facilities like Abkake, it could do so. And it could it could it could threaten Hormuz for much longer than the market is is aware of, or or let's say is expecting. They will expect it will be over by three days. I don't think it's going to over by three days.
lpaltiguzman: Yeah. So the hope is that Iran has been infiltrated enough by Mossad agent or people that have turned against the Mullah and the Ayatollah and will help from inside to also, yeah, dismantle the regime.
lpaltiguzman: I mean, yeah.
Bob McNally: that's right. Yeah, this ends with a good story. Iran is eventually going to have a government like its people. People are enormously powerful and resilient and entrepreneurial.
Bob McNally: They are wonderful. And eventually that regime will fall.
lpaltiguzman: Yeah.
Bob McNally: The question is, can we get to that day without having to have a conflict in the region as it goes down?
lpaltiguzman: Mm-hmm.
lpaltiguzman: Well, on those notes, and I really hope also that you know the Iranian people, as you mentioned, and the women that have been so courageous um get you know the freedom they deserve.
lpaltiguzman: and And for Iran to become, again, a friendly nation to to the US, to Israel, that would have transformations for the Middle East and all the alliances also between the countries.
Bob McNally: Right.
Bob McNally: Right.
Bob McNally: Right.
lpaltiguzman: um So I wanted also to talk a little bit about what has kept you busy as a more personal and your professional trajectory, Bob.
lpaltiguzman: um So you've always advocated for bipartisanship, but also for um the reliability of data oil data, notably, and the fact that it should be depoliticized.
lpaltiguzman: And whether it's the EIA or the International Energy Agency, you've been very vocal at a personal level and have waited with your influence and in debates in DC and elsewhere.
Bob McNally: Thank you.
lpaltiguzman: um Do you feel your voice has been heard? And where are we in the debate about reliable data? but
Bob McNally: Well, it's an ongoing struggle. And the good thing is it's bipartisan. You know, Democrat, Republican, serious energy experts, policy participants, we all agree on a lot of things. And one is we should have ample objective, timely, comprehensive data on the most important commodity in the world, ah oil and gas, you know hydrocarbons. And that's just a no brainer. And so, you know, we've had some successes. I was just, as I said, at the International Energy Forum meeting in Riyadh, where the IA, Fatih Birol, the head of the IA was back there. and It was great to see him back there. He had not come for a few years. There was tension between the IA
Bob McNally: certainly OPEC, you know many experts myself, because you know for five years, the IEA had decided to not publish any scenario that showed oil and gas demand rising in the future. They they they they only would forecast these peak scenarios, and they, in so doing, sort of helped this narrative get formed and this investment misallocation had taken place. But to its credit, to its credit the IEA last November resumed let's say, normal, let's say, objective, conventional modeling. And they and they they included these, what we call a reference case or a business as usual scenario that it showed oil and gas demand increasing. You can have scenarios where there's tougher climate action and lower demand, that's fine.
Bob McNally: But you don't want to censor other scenarios, especially since given the data we talked about earlier in the policy, it's quite clear that we're not decarbonizing as fast as everyone thought four or five years ago.
lpaltiguzman: Mm-hmm.
Bob McNally: So look, we we correct the IAEA corrected a mistake. That's good. They were back. And now we're having reasonable debates about many things and those can be had.
Bob McNally: So I think we've made a and i was i played a role in that i think a little bit and raising concern and attention about the politicization of forecasts especially from agencies that we we rely on to help us navigate the future now then there's the backward steps the trump administration decided to leave the ief i think that's very unfortunate the if was all about better data jody and so forth uh i don't see the sense in that at all i hope we'll correct that mistake and
lpaltiguzman: Mm-hmm.
lpaltiguzman: Yeah.
Bob McNally: and go back in there and and work on that. I was very proud working for President Bush to help bring us into the International Energy Forum because of the importance of strong data. You know, my friend Jason Bordoff, who had my job for President Obama, he's supportive of it. You know, it's something that we all should agree on.
Bob McNally: So we have some wins, we have some setbacks, but the cause continues because at the end of the day, hydrocarbons are the lifeblood of modern civilization. And we all should agree that we should be able to count them, count what's going on as best we can and do an analysis based on objective data, reasonable assumptions, open minds, no political censorship, either direction.
lpaltiguzman: Yeah.
Bob McNally: that That's in our best interest, all of us.
lpaltiguzman: Yeah. And I think it goes way beyond you know the oil data. I think There is a tendency to have activists or ideologically driven people within institutions that are trying to um you know make their hopes ah become policy, right?
lpaltiguzman: and and And that, unfortunately, could lead to bias projections or data.
Bob McNally: Right. It's costly to look at the write downs that auto companies and oil companies are taking on their misplaced bets on quick EV penetration or getting out of oil into renewables. I won't name any names, but we could quickly find very well known companies that are taking huge write downs because they bet wrong.
Bob McNally: uh on something that was really i think politically driven wishful thinking not sound analysis so forecasts have consequences they're costly when when they're politicized i hope we've learned that lesson i really do sometimes you have to learn lessons the hard way uh you have to touch the stove the hot stove to learn it's not hot to learn not to do that so let's hope that we've learned that lesson
lpaltiguzman: Well, thank you so much, Bob, for coming to the podcast. And I wish you a safe trip. um And we'll have you back soon, I hope. And depending on what's going on in Iran, I think we touched on it and we'll discuss those fascinating elements in the near future, I think.
Bob McNally: Leslie, thank you for having me on. Safe travels. Great job. Keep it going. these This podcast is excellent. You're a great expert in your own right, and then you bring together great folks. And so keep it going.
Bob McNally: We need discussions like this.
lpaltiguzman: you.
Bob McNally: So thank you very much. I'm honored that you have me on again.
lpaltiguzman: Thank you.
lpaltiguzman: This podcast was recorded on February
Bob McNally: sixth.
lpaltiguzman: 6th, 2026. I have the music. And this is Leslie Peltie Guzman saying good day and good luck.
