#977 Alex Epstein On Why We Need More Fossil Fuels Not Less

— ESG movement's flawed premises about rapid fossil fuel replacement and climate catastrophe claims obscure the real benefits of fossil fuels for human flourishing and energy poverty reduction.

— Climate-related disaster death rates have fallen 98% over the past century, driven largely by fossil fuel-powered infrastructure like irrigation, heating, cooling, and sturdy buildings—a fact rarely discussed by mainstream climate advocates.

— Solar and wind renewables currently provide only 3% of global energy, cannot reliably replace the 80% supplied by fossil fuels, and depend on battery storage costs (estimated $400 trillion to back up the world for three days) that make widespread deployment economically implausible.

— Government overregulation of nuclear energy—treating it as a criminal enterprise rather than the safest energy source by track record—has prevented cost-effective development and innovation in reactor design since the 1970s.

— Academic studies promoting rapid renewable replacement rely on three common fallacies: proposing untested technologies at massive scale, requiring unprecedented crash-program mining in hostile anti-development regulatory environments, and ignoring the present-day failures of solar and wind integration.

— Three billion people currently live in energy poverty, using less electricity than a single refrigerator, yet ESG advocates ignore both the massive unmet global energy demand and fossil fuels' critical role in human development and prosperity.

— Read *Fossil Future* and share free resources from [energytalkingpoints.com](https://energytalkingpoints.com) with influential contacts; pre-order the book this week via [fossilfuture.com](https://fossilfuture.com) to access a 90-minute conversation between Epstein and Peter Thiel, plus additional resources.

— Advocate for decriminalization (not mere deregulation) of nuclear energy by contacting elected officials, focusing on rational endangerment standards that reflect nuclear's superior safety record compared to other energy sources.

— Evaluate energy policy and investment decisions by rigorously weighing both benefits *and* side effects of all energy sources—a principle Epstein argues is widely agreed upon but rarely practiced by mainstream climate advocates.