Alex Epstein

@AlexEpstein ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated No

Last Checked Dec. 28, 2022

Created

Wed Dec 21 17:13:22 +0000 2022

Likes

222

Retweets

Source

Typefully

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

"Green" leaders supported nuclear—until it became cost-effective, at which point they demonized and criminalized it. "Green" leaders supported natural gas—until it became cost-effective on a global scale thanks to shale energy tech, at which point they demonized it as "fracking." — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Dec. 21, 2022

Preceded By

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

The fundamental hostility of the "green" movement to energy explains why throughout its history it has never supported current, cost-effective source of energy and only "supported" imaginary sources of energy that might exist in the future. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Dec. 21, 2022

Followed By

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

Because the "green" movement is anti-energy, any enthusiasm its leaders express for fusion is phony; while they may claim to want clean, cheap, abundant energy before it exists, they will not like the impact it has once it exists. And in the past, green leaders admitted this. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Dec. 21, 2022