Deleted tweet detection is currently running at reduced
capacity due to changes to the Twitter API. Some tweets that have been
deleted by the tweet author may not be labeled as deleted in the PolitiTweet
interface.
Showing page 160 of 295.
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
"The climate debate ignores the reasons we burn fossil fuels in the first place. Alex Epstein reminds us that rich countries may be able to treat green lifestyles as luxury fashion, but for much of the world reliable energy is a matter of life and death." - @peterthiel https://t.co/qePachd2Le — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
RT @chiproytx: Read this. The IRA is massively damaging to Americans and their access to reliable, affordable energy. #EnergyFreedom — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
“Not only are solar/wind incapable of replacing fossil fuels, but the control of their supply by China dwarfs any nation's influence over fossil fuels.” https://t.co/g5lfwvyKOd — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
If you're new to my work, follow me @AlexEpstein for extreme clarity on energy, environmental, and climate issues from a humanist perspective. Also, subscribe to my newsletter, featuring lots of concise, powerful, well-referenced energy talking points. https://t.co/NS8O3mzWft — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
Summary: Don’t believe the “IRA” myths; the "IRA" is a *4-step recipe for destroying American energy* 1. Make us more dependent on unreliable electricity 2. Impose new oil/gas taxes 3. Give EPA more power to restrict fossil fuels 4. Give more power to anti-fossil-fuel activists — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
None of the 126 economists the White House says we should bow to the authority of has addressed the argument that increased dependence on (China-controlled) unreliable solar/wind plus increased restriction of fossil fuels will drive up energy prices and therefore all prices. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
Bonus Myth: The IRA is good for our economy because 126 economists said so. Truth: Not only is it absurd of the White House to claim that a letter by less than 1% of economists means anything, but the letter they cite makes no economic argument but rather vague assertions. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
Most IRA opponents don’t deny humans impact climate. What we “deny” is that any negative climate impacts of fossil fuels outweigh FFs’ massive, life-or-death benefits for billions. And we certainly “deny” that wrecking US energy to lower US emissions solves anything globally. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
Myth 12: The IRA is a victory against “climate deniers.” Truth: The IRA is a victory against “climate thinkers,” who know that modest CO2 reductions can’t be worth the devastation of 1) dependence on unreliable energy 2) making fossil fuel more expensive during an energy crisis. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
The IRA is one of the most corrupt laws in US history. It funnels billions of $ into the pockets of solar, wind, EV, and other industries while punishing their competition. It also provides billions of $ for Democrat political machinery disguised as "climate justice" funding. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
It is hard to imagine a bill more full of special interest favoritism than the IRA, which will pay up to 70% of the cost of wind turbines (the equivalent of paying $70K for a $100K EV) and 50%+ of the cost of “green hydrogen” that’s nowhere near competitive. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
If the IRA sought rapid US emissions reduction, it would immediately and massively tax fossil fuel use. That would be terrible for our std of living (which is why I’m against rapid emissions cuts) but it would be honest. The IRA dishonestly enriches green special interests. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
Myth 11: The IRA is a victory against “special interests” Truth: The IRA prioritizes “green” special interests above all else. While it claims to be about rapid emissions reduction, it only hopes to reduce emissions by 10 %age pts. It’s real focus is enriching the green lobby. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
As we are now witnessing in Europe—where a lack-of-fossil-fuel crisis is causing mass hardship, deindustrialization, and fear of freezing this winter—lack of fossil fuels is incalculably deadly. That’s what the IRA promises. And yet pro-IRA “models” attribute no cost to this! — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
The WH model also assumes fractions of a ° of warming will be catastrophic. E.g., that warming will be catastrophic for agriculture even though agriculture has thrived with warming so far—and can continue to thrive on a warmer planet with more CO2 using GMOs and other tech. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
It is clear that any policy that forces us to use costly “alternatives” and adds costs to fossil fuels will raise the price of energy—and raising the cost of energy increases the cost of everything. Yet the WH model totally ignores these catastrophic costs. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
The White House’s celebrated “$1.9 trillion” number comes from an extremely speculative model assessment by the WH’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) that ranges from "$0.7 and $1.9 trillion" in "social benefits" over 3 decades. This “model” does not at all model reality. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
Myth 10: The IRA will save us $1.9T in “social costs” This fiction comes from a “model” that 1) ignores the huge costs of increased dependence on unreliable solar/wind and of new, onerous restrictions on fossil fuels. 2) assumes fractions of a degree warming are catastrophic. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
For a mild preview of climate danger under the IRA, see Europe—where citizens are increasingly afraid of summer and (especially) winter—not because of 1°C warming in the past 170 yrs but because many can’t afford AC and heat. Just part of the hardship caused by “green” policies. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
The IRA harms American energy by coercing us to use costly, unreliable “green” energy and by restricting fossil fuel production. This will dramatically increase the cost of energy, which will lower our climate mastery ability, which will make us more vulnerable to climate danger. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
As illustrated by the last century, in which CO2 levels rose and climate-related disaster deaths plummeted, the main determinant of climate danger is not CO2 but our *climate mastery ability*. And climate mastery requires energy to power machines that heat, cool, irrigate, etc. https://t.co/wEPhgS8VyF — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
Myth 9: The IRA will protect us from climate danger Truth: Even if the IRA had a significant effect on global emissions, which it won’t, it would *increase* climate danger by making America poorer and thus far less resilient to all forms of climate danger—natural or manmade. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
The alleged reward we get for the IRA’s endless, costly subsidies and for its costly new restrictions on fossil fuels, is, *according to supporters*, just a 10 %age pt decrease in US emissions. Globally that’s 1.4 %age pts. In practice it’ll be lower due to offshored emissions. https://t.co/BpbQCCNz61 — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
China (> 30% of global emissions) already emits more than twice what the US does (< 14%) and is on a growth trajectory, as Chinese are still far poorer and emit far less per capita than we do. China will obviously not follow anything like the IRA. https://t.co/hGA9vpbJvI — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
Instead of liberating nuclear or doing anything else to bring about globally-competitive alternatives, the IRA gives an endless trough of subsidies to “green energy” projects that can’t compete on their own. This punishes Americans but won’t affect global emissions. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
The only practical and moral approach to lowering CO2 emissions is to bring about sources of energy that are globally cost-competitive—so that China, India, and everyone else will eagerly use them. The most promising way to do this is to liberate reliable, dense nuclear energy. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
An honest approach to CO2 emissions must recognize that they are a global issue—and they are rising because the world needs far more energy and CO2-emitting fossil fuels are usually the cheapest way to provide it. E.g., China and India are developing hundreds of new coal plants. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
Myth 8: The IRA will rapidly lower CO2 emissions Truth: CO2 emissions are a global issue; the only practical way of lowering them is developing globally cost-competitive low-carbon energy. The IRA’s subsidies for non-competitive low-carbon energy will have little global effect. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
Not only does China dominate mining and processing of "renewable" materials, they dominate its manufacturing thanks to low-cost fossil fueled (especially coal) factories. By making electricity more expensive and less reliable the IRA makes us even less competitive in this space. — PolitiTweet.org
Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein
China dominates the mining and processing of "renewable" materials to a staggering degree. We do little mining or processing of the needed materials, largely because of "green" restrictions the IRA worsens. Our dependence on China for solar/wind dwarfs any oil/gas dependence. — PolitiTweet.org
