Alex Epstein

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

I spent a lot of time thinking about what I could do, as the world’s leading champion of fossil fuels, to change the world’s deadly anti-FF trajectory. I decided the most impactful thing I could do was write a new book that was 10X better than The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

Part 6: Fossil Future: An irrefutable and unstoppable case While pro-human thinking about fossil fuels has been on the rise, it has been no match for the growing scope of the anti-FF movement, which has totally mainstreamed the murderous goal of rapidly eliminating fossil fuels. https://t.co/5bpMzL0rHA — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

My energy talking points greatly increased the world’s exposure to my pro-human energy thinking and the case for more fossil fuel use. This has made it impossible for mainstream thinkers to ignore my latest and most important project: Fossil Future. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

After pioneering a new caliber of messaging with Energy Talking Points, I created a program exclusively for major elected officials and staff to give them custom, current guidance on energy messaging. This program now has members from 170+ major political offices. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

The first phase of Energy Talking Points was to create a website, https://t.co/NrUWETzj9v, that offered concise, powerful, well-referenced messaging on many energy issues from a pro-human, pro-freedom perspective. This got great feedback from politicians and active citizens. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

Part 5: Energy Talking Points In 2020, I created Energy Talking Points to solve a crucial problem: elected officials as well as citizens who wanted to promote pro-energy, pro-freedom policies didn’t have good messaging—the right words for the right situation. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

Even though it was very popular, Moral Case was mostly ignored by mainstream thinkers and outlets. Instead of engaging me they decided to pretend that I, my book, and my pro-human arguments didn’t exist. But this strategy was doomed to fail as I found new ways to spread my ideas. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

Most importantly, the book was right. It correctly predicted that any negative side-effects of fossil fuel use would be outweighed by the unique benefits of fossil fuels to human flourishing—including their unrivaled ability to provide low-cost, reliable energy to billions. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

For a book that took 6 months and many did not expect to succeed, The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels did incredibly well, becoming a NYT bestseller. It influenced many elected officials as well as many CEOs—some of whom finally started standing up for their beleaguered industry. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

Part 4: The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels I was given 6 months to write MCFF and somehow I did this. Two big helps were my researcher Steffen Henne, who knows a ton and is good at catching errors, and my philosopher friend @gsalmieri, who helped me quickly clarify my thinking. https://t.co/ymXm65zkR7 — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

In 2013, an agent watched my debate with Bill McKibben and was impressed. He read an essay I had written on “the moral case for fossil fuels” and thought he could get a major publisher to pick it up. I was skeptical, but he was right—and a game-changing book was born. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

I did debates and crashed protests to prove a point: my pro-human way of thinking about energy is right, my conclusion that we need more fossil fuels is right, and my conviction in these things is far greater than the conformist pseudo-conviction of the anti-fossil-fuel movement. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

I also took my views to anti-fossil-fuel protests, including Occupy Wall Street in 2011 and the People’s Climate March in 2014–where I stood against 300,000 protestors with a giant I Love Fossil Fuels sign. https://t.co/b52eL5nVNR — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

I debated a Greenpeace rep in 2011, leading anti-fossil fuel activist Bill McKibben in 2012, a Sierra Club leader in 2013, etc. While I didn’t know anywhere near as much then as now, these debates started showing the merits of my pro-human approach. https://t.co/b52eL5nVNR — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

My initial strategy to prove the value of my pro-human energy thinking was to make my approach known by taking the fight to people I disagreed with: by challenging them to public debates and even debating them at their rallies. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

For more on my business model and how I have maintained intellectual independence, read this article and/or watch the last 30 minutes of this interview with @jordanbpeterson. https://t.co/b0dkijgdZX https://t.co/eEkEqKeXU1 — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

I decided to make my organization a *for-profit* business, on the premise that if my ideas were as valuable as I thought the public would be willing to pay enough for my books and speeches for me to be able to make a decent living. And I liked the discipline of the market. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

Part 3: Starting a pro-human energy movement To publicize my pro-human approach to energy I decided to start my own organization that would be the base of a pro-human energy movement as well as a pro-human approach to other forms of industry: the Center for Industrial Progress. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

When I looked at the full benefits and side-effects of fossil fuels from a human flourishing perspective, I quickly discovered that, as the subtitle of my book Fossil Future says, “global human flourishing requires more oil, coal, and natural gas—not less.” — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

I decided to become an energy expert who used pro-human philosophical ideas to evaluate our energy choices and made good policy recommendations. Above all I wanted to learn about the full benefits and side-effects of fossil fuels and spread the truth far and wide. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

Realizing that leading thinkers and institutions were driven by anti-human ideas to ignore fossil fuels’ benefits and catastrophize their side-effects made me scared and motivated—scared their policy prescriptions were deadly, and motivated to learn the truth for myself. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

Observe that leading opponents of fossil fuels are not just hostile to fossil fuels but also to nuclear, hydro, and the mining and development involved in solar and wind. Always because of their impact on Earth. Clearly they prioritize eliminating impact over human flourishing. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

The major philosophical reason leading thinkers ignore fossil fuels’ benefits is that their primary moral goal is not advancing human flourishing on Earth but eliminating human impact on Earth. To them FFs’ benefits are unimportant or even bad (because they impact Earth a lot). — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

The truth is that Earth is not a “delicate nurturer” but “wild potential” (dynamic, deficient, dangerous) and human beings are “producer-improvers” who can impact it for the better. When you recognize this truth you value human impact and expect us overcome problems. https://t.co/EqJcwlpIt1 — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

Insofar as you believe that Earth is a “delicate nurturer,” you believe that human beings are “parasite polluters” whose impact on Earth will *inevitably* lead to disaster. That’s why catastrophists keep thinking their next catastrophe prediction will be the one that’s right. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

The major philosophical reason leading thinkers catastrophize the side-effects of fossil fuels is a false assumption I call the “delicate nurturer assumption”: Earth unimpacted by humans exists in a delicate, nurturing (stable, safe, sufficient) balance that human impact ruins. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

My philosophy background enabled me to understand why our leading thinkers made the errors of ignoring the benefits of fossil fuels and catastrophizing the side-effects: they accept, sometimes knowingly sometimes not, anti-human *assumptions* and anti-human *values*. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

For example, as I document in Chapter 2 of Fossil Future, our leading thinkers and institutions predicted for decades that fossil fuels would drive catastrophic resource depletion, pollution, and climate danger, whereas in fact FFs drove huge improvements in all these areas. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

I also learned that in addition to ignoring the benefits of fossil fuels, many of our leading thinkers and institutions have a track record of *catastrophizing* the side-effects of fossil fuels—predicting fossil fuels would make life terrible when in fact they made it far better. — PolitiTweet.org

Alex Epstein @AlexEpstein

I learned that the widely respected IPCC does not acknowledge the massive decrease in *climate-related* disaster deaths driven by fossil fuels. This is as disreputable as a panel on polio that doesn't acknowledge the massive decrease in polio deaths driven by the polio vaccine. — PolitiTweet.org