The ESG divestment movement poses as a long-range, financially savvy, and moral movement. In reality it is a short-range, financially ruinous, and deeply immoral movement that perpetuates poverty in the poorest places and threatens the security of the free world.

Over the last 5-10 years, "ESG"--standing for Environmental Social Governance--has gone from an acronym that virtually no one knew or cared about, to a cultishly-embraced top priority of financial regulators, markets, and institutions around the world.
The preposterous financial pretense of "ESG investing" is that the promoters of it have so accurately identified universal norms of long-term value creation--Environmental norms, Social norms, and Governance norms--that imposing those norms on every company is justified.
In reality, ESG was a movement cooked up at the UN--not exactly a leading expert in profitable investment--to impose moral and political agendas, largely left-wing ones, on institutions that would not adopt them if left to their own devices.
The number one practical meaning of ESG today is: divest from fossil fuels in every way possible, and associate yourself with "renewable" solar and wind in every way possible. That's why I call it the "ESG divestment movement."
Modern ESG's obsession with unreliable "renewable" solar and wind, reflects its political nature. Any serious concern about CO2 emissions means embracing the only proven, reliable, globally scalable source of non-carbon energy: nuclear. But most ESG does not embrace nuclear.
Divesting from fossil fuels is immoral because:
1. The world needs much more energy.
2. Fossil fuels are the only way to provide most of that energy for the foreseeable future.
3. Any problems associated with CO2 pale in comparison to problems of energy deprivation.
The world needs much more energy

Low-cost, reliable energy enables billions of people to enjoy the miracle of modern machines that make us productive and prosperous. Yet 800M people have no electricity and 2.6B people are still using wood or dung for heating and cooking.
Fossil fuels are indispensable

Only fossil fuels provide low-cost, reliable, versatile, global-scale energy.

Unreliable solar and wind can't come close. That's why fossil fuels continue to grow in the developing world; China and India have 100s of coal plants in development.
CO2 levels matter much less than energy availability, 1

CO2 emissions have contributed to the warming of the last 170 years, but that warming has been minor and masterable—1 degree C, mostly in cold parts of the world. And life on Earth thrived when CO2 levels were >5X today's.
CO2 levels matter much less than energy availability, 2

Fossil fuels have made climate far safer by powering a highly resilient civilization. That's why climate disaster deaths—from extreme temps, droughts, wildfires, storms, and floods—have decreased 98% over the last century.
A moral financial movement would do everything it could to increase capital for all cost-effective energy, including fossil fuels. And including nuclear, which is by far the most promising form of low-carbon energy. Instead, ESG is starving cost-effective energy of capital.
By starving cost-effective energy of capital, the ESG movement is engaging in a fundamental act of mass destruction. Energy is the industry that powers every other industry. By making energy more expensive, ESG makes everything more expensive--hurting the poorest people most.
The most egregious immorality of the ESG movement, led by Larry Fink's Blackrock, is its effort to destroy vital fossil fuel projects in poor places that desperately need them. This effort is guaranteed to perpetuate poverty.
Example of ESG poverty perpetuation: South Korea canceled new coal plants in South Africa and the Philippines after "Global investors including Blackrock...warned the South Korean utility to drop coal power projects."
Another example of ESG poverty perpetuation: "International investors are increasingly restricting support to companies involved in extracting or consuming coal, yet nearly 70% of India’s electricity comes from coal plants, and demand for power is set to rise..."
ESG poverty perpetuation is getting worse as activist "investors" with increasing influence on large financial institutions try to stop all fossil fuel projects in poor places.

E.g., HSBC was attacked when it decided to fund 6 new coal power plants in Indonesia and Vietnam.
ESG defunding fossil fuel projects in the poorest parts of the world will mean: more babies die for lack of incubators and other medical equipment, more deaths from lack of water treatment plants and modern sanitation, more deaths from lack of heating and air-conditioning.
Every leading ESG institution should be called out for their genocidal policies toward the poorest parts of the world. They should be shamed for placing their own virtue-signaling above billions of actual human lives. They should lose all moral authority in the realm of energy.
The ESG movement is also an enormous threat to the security of the free world, because by depriving free countries and poor countries of low-cost, reliable energy, it furthers Communist China's ambitions to become the world's superpower using low-cost, reliable fossil fuels.
China has a clear strategy of running its economy on fossil fuels, while encouraging others to run on inferior, unreliable solar and wind — that is made using Chinese fossil fuels, which produce 85% of Chinese energy. China has 247 GW of coal plants (3 TX's worth) in development.
China dominates the mining and processing of "renewable" materials to a staggering degree. The US does little mining or processing of the needed materials, largely because of "green" regulations. Our dependence on China for "renewables" dwarfs past Mideast oil dependence.
Energy security is national security. When hostile foreign powers can meaningfully cut off our access to energy they can manipulate us politically. Examples: US appeasement of Saudi Arabia and European appeasement of Russia.
Energy security is national security, above all in wartime. War requires continuous high-energy manufacturing and continuous fueling of high-energy mobile machines such as planes and aircraft carriers. Both world wars were won by the side with the most oil, the fuel of mobility.
What does the modern ESG movement do about the danger of an energy-dominant China? Deny reality and serve as "useful idiots."

Example: Larry Fink's sole mention of China in his influential letter to CEOs was to praise China's "historic commitments to achieve net zero emissions"!
The ESG divestment movement should be publicly shamed as a virtue-signaling, financially idiotic, and most importantly immoral movement that perpetuates poverty and threatens freedom. All legal pressures to adopt it should be eliminated. ESG should be boycotted wherever possible.
The anti-energy, anti-freedom ESG movement should be replaced with a voluntary *long-term value creation movement*. Creating sustained value for companies' owners requires a long-term perspective. But a long-term perspective means valuing cost-effective energy, not destroying it.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Alex Epstein

Alex Epstein Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AlexEpstein

4 Jun
The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (@NARUC) has published a damning study of California's embrace of unreliable solar and wind, which has caused blackouts and will cause many more.

But the study's language is way too mild. So I will translate.

"California’s rapid and ongoing growth of intermittent resources like wind and solar has flourished, while baseload and dispatchable resources have declined."

= California cannot produce much of its needed electricity on demand.
"Significant loss-of-load events...often result from a combination of factors…. including: actual loads exceeding forecasts; significant variability in wind and solar output; reduced imports from neighboring states"


Many more blackouts as other states embrace unreliables.
Read 8 tweets
25 May
IEA falsely claims it has done the "first comprehensive study of how to transition to a net-zero energy system by 2050 while ensuring stable and affordable energy supplies, providing universal energy access, and enabling robust economic growth." Check out @pwrhungry's expose.🧵
Green energy "models," @pwrhungry observes, ignore "myriad supply-chain problems...would come from attempting a massive increase in the use of solar panels, including the sourcing of polysilicon from China, and in particular, from Xinjiang province..."…
Green energy "models," @pwrhungry also observes, ignore "the difficulty inherent in trying to string the hundreds of thousands of miles of high-voltage transmission lines that will be needed to connect wind and solar projects in rural areas to distant cities."
Read 19 tweets
15 May
Bitcoin stands for honest money.

Thus it is sad to see many advocates of Bitcoin, in the name of deflecting "green" criticism, buy into the massive dishonesty that the parasitical solar/wind/offset "industry" has been perpetrating for years.

Some correctives...🧵
Q: Aren't solar and wind cheap?
A: Solar and wind are "unreliables" that depend on reliable fossil fuel, nuclear, and hydro infrastructure. They don't replace the cost of fossil fuels, they add to the cost of fossil fuels. More solar+wind = higher prices.
Here's how the "100% renewable" fraud works.…
Read 12 tweets
14 May
The Biden administration is using the recent hacking of the Colonial Pipeline to portray oil as an insecure fuel that needs to be replaced by electricity. In reality, Biden's scheme of mandatory EVs on a wind-and-solar-dependent grid would be catastrophically insecure.

The empty gas stations all over the East Coast in the wake of the hacking of the Colonial Pipeline have brought energy security to the forefront of our minds. Many wonder: How can we prevent this, or something worse, from happening again? The worst answer is: mandatory EVs.
It's important to note that even with the weeklong disruption of a pipeline that transports 105 million gallons of fuel daily, there has still been enough gasoline available to meet normal gasoline demand. The empty gas stations have come from media-induced panic-buying.
Read 18 tweets
12 May
As the great @MarkPMills points out in his @WSJopinion piece on the physical requirements of the promised "green energy" transition, "there are no plans to fund and build the necessary mines and refineries." Once again we see the inherent idiocy of government-dictated energy. 🧵
"The IEA finds that with a global energy transition like the one President Biden envisions, demand for key minerals such as lithium, graphite, nickel and rare-earth metals would explode, rising by 4,200%, 2,500%, 1,900% and 700%, respectively, by 2040." --@MarkPMills
"The world doesn’t have the capacity to meet such demand. As the IEA observes, albeit in cautious bureaucratese, there are no plans to fund and build the necessary mines and refineries. The supply of ETMs is entirely aspirational." --@MarkPMills…
Read 11 tweets
6 May
One of the most obvious opportunities the US is currently squandering is the export of LNG--liquefied natural gas. LNG can provide low-cost, reliable, clean natural gas around the world. But LNG's enormous potential is being strangled by irrational permitting policies.

Natural gas is an incredibly versatile fuel--providing low-cost, clean residential heating; low-cost, clean "industrial process heat"; and low-cost, highly controllable and reliable clean electricity.
While natural gas used to be so hard to get that the US imported it, thanks to fracking and other shale energy technologies, the US now has a virtually limitless supply of low-cost, reliable, versatile, clean natural gas.
Read 11 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!