*Corporate Energy Liar exposed*

Budweiser claims its beers are "100% renewable." In fact, most of the energy that goes into its beer is fossil fuel.

Learn how @BudweiserUSA is lying about its energy use and why that's so damaging--then join me in calling for a public apology.👇
Today's Budweiser cans and Budweiser ads are plastered with logos saying "100% renewable electricity"--leading customers to think that if they drink Budweiser they are not using any fossil fuel.

But in reality *most of the energy that goes into a Bud is fossil fuel*.
When you drink a Budweiser beer you are indirectly using energy in many ways: mining for aluminum, manufacturing cans, farming hops, brewing beer, transporting beer, and refrigeration. Most of this energy comes from fossil fuels.

How can Bud claim "100% renewable"? Deception.
Budweiser falsely advertises its beers as "100% renewable" through 3 deceptions.
1. Only counting brewing—a small % of beer’s energy use.
2. Only counting the fraction of brewing energy that comes from electricity.
3. Falsely labeling its fossil fuel electricity as "renewable."
Budweiser deception 1: Only counting brewing—a small % of beer’s energy use

When we see a "100% renewable electricity" label, we think the whole product was made using renewable electricity.

But Budweiser only counts *brewing*--just 10% of the overall energy used in a beer!
Budweiser deception 2: Only counting the fraction of brewing energy that comes from electricity.

When we read “brewed with 100% renewable electricity,” we think that no fossil fuel was used in brewing.

But most energy used in Bud’s brewing is heat, usually from natural gas!
How many of Budweiser's customers reading a "brewed with 100% renewable electricity" label have any idea that most of the brewing is being done using fossil fuels--including this natural gas facility in Jacksonville that Budweiser uses?
Budweiser deception 3: Falsely labeling its fossil fuel electricity as "renewable."

On top of deceiving customers by only focusing on brewing, and ignoring all the fossil fuel energy used in brewing, Budweiser is also deceiving customers even about its 10% brewing electricity.
Budweiser beer is brewed in many places, such as Houston, TX, where over 50% of the electricity comes from fossil fuels. Budweiser literally pays utilities to give them credit for others’ renewable electricity and give others the blame for Bud’s nonrenewable electricity!
An example of deceiving the public through "renewable electricity credits": Budweiser's "brewed using 100% renewable electricity" claim includes wind electricity near BiIlings, OK--even though no Budweiser beer is brewed in Oklahoma!
Budweiser’s ubiquitous “100% renewable electricity” labeling of its beers—which ignores most of its energy use, ignores most of its brewing energy, and falsely claims credits for others’ renewable electricity—absolutely qualifies as lying to the public and must be stopped.
Budweiser's energy lying is bad not only because it involves winning customers via deception (the essence of fraud) but because it helps promote the dangerous idea that "100% renewable electricity" is possible and desirable--when in reality it is impossible, and dangerous to try.
One other negative consequence of Budweiser’s “100% renewable” focus is that it discriminates against nuclear energy—a form of non-carbon energy has has far more promising long-term potential than “renewable” solar and wind.
The biggest victims of anti-fossil fuel, anti-nuclear lies about “100% renewable” are poor people—both the poor in the US who are most harmed by rising energy prices, and above all impoverished people around the world who need fossil fuels to develop.
Budweiser’s lying about being 100% renewable, and its support of anti-fossil fuel, anti-nuclear policies is particularly shameful given that Budweiser's leaders, including its Board members, like all wealthy people, directly and indirectly use huge amounts of fossil fuel.
Consider Jorge Paulo Lemann, the controlling shareholder of Anheuser-Busch InBev, the parent company of Budweiser. He sanctions Bud's "100% renewable" propaganda yet owns several private jets and a large yacht called the "Anawa," while living in a fossil fueled mega-mansion.
Budweiser needs to apologize for its energy lying, remove all “100% renewable electricity” messaging, and publicly acknowledge the vital role of fossil fuels and nuclear power.

Tell Budweiser to do this by tweeting at @budweiserusa and Sustainability Officer @EzgiBarcenas.

• • •

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

16 Nov
LinkedIn has finally "explained" why they took down my popular video criticizing COP 26: "false claims of denying climate change due to the use of fossil fuels."

But my video contains no such claims, and in fact contains two *affirmations* by me of manmade climate change!
Last week LinkedIn took down, without explanation, this popular video of mine criticizing COP 26. The video had 11,000 views when they took it down, and was spreading rapidly.
Here's the transcript of my video criticizing COP 26. At no point do I deny "climate change due to the use of fossil fuels." At 2 points I affirm it--as acknowledged by the host: "AS YOU RECOGNIZE YOURSELF, HUMANS DO HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE CLIMATE."
Read 5 tweets
12 Nov
This taxonomy of "woke religion" by @peterboghossian and
@ShellenbergerMD is fascinating.

Question: What's the essence of "woke"?

My working answers:
* anti-achievement
* anti-value

There's always some achievement/value "woke" is trying to destroy.🧵
In the case of climate change/catastrophism, the achievement of industrial civilization, which has made human life incomparably better--including far safer from climate--is the object of "woke" hatred and attempts at destruction. The hatred/destruction includes nuclear and hydro.
In the case of racism, "woke" claims to be focused on racial discrimination but its actual focus is on denigrating myriad achievements--America's success, individuals' career success, even mathematics--as "racist." (What could be more racist than calling math/logic "white"?)
Read 8 tweets
11 Nov
Here we go...LinkedIn has, without explanation, taken down my popular evisceration of COP 26. The last time they took down a post of mine they ended up reinstating it and apologizing...

Help fight suppression of the truth by continuing to share the Twitter version of this video.
Here's what happened the last time LinkedIn took down a post of mine...they were obviously wrong, and to their credit, reinstated the post and apologized. But it took a lot of public attention to get there.

@reidhoffman want to help expedite the process?
As I said in the video that LinkedIn is currently suppressing, if platforms are doing fact-checking they shouldn't be trying to fact-check me--I have the best research team in the world on these issues--they should be trying to hire me and my team.
Read 4 tweets
11 Nov
Before and during COP 26, I have claimed that it is not a scientific conference but a pseudoscientific, anti-human conference that is pursuing mass-genocide.

The COP 26 Agreement has proven me right. Here are the top 5 reasons the Agreement is pseudoscientific and anti-human.
Reason 1 the COP 26 Agreement is pseudoscientific and anti-human: It calls for the rapid elimination of fossil fuels—the source of 80% of the world’s energy—without addressing the *cost* of doing so. In fact, the word “cost” is not mentioned once in the Agreement!
Reason 2 the COP 26 Agreement is pseudoscientific and anti-human: It totally ignores the benefits of low-cost, reliable energy in general and fossil fuels in particular. The word “energy” is not mentioned once, even though COP 26 is trying to eliminate 80% of the world’s energy!
Read 7 tweets
10 Nov
John Kerry casually mentioned in a COP 26 interview that the US won't be using any coal by 2030.

What an ignorant and presumptuous wannabe dictator he is.

In the last several years, reliable, *resilient* coal has bailed out solar, wind, and even natural gas many times.

This past winter, reliable, resilient coal bailed out solar/wind (which largely disappear when it's very cold) as well as natural gas (which is more vulnerable than coal to supply disruptions) in many states including OK--see this quote from @GovStitt.
The disastrous TX blackouts should have taught us that we need power plants that are 1) reliable and 2) resilient. Reliable means: they can produce as much power as we need, when we need it. Resilient means: they can keep producing power even under adverse conditions.
Read 8 tweets
9 Nov
Since the global media have no interest in publicizing the pro-energy activists in poor countries who are challenging COP 26, I will. Here are some comments by @nj_ayuk, head of the Africa Energy Chamber, who points out that "600 million Africans have no lights."

"I respect China and Russia who aren’t attending #COP26. They’ve no intention of playing games and will drive up their energy industry while the West impoverishes their citizens through radical action."
--African energy leader @nj_ayuk
"Ironically not attending is better for the planet than the hypocrites arriving by private jets and burning a few million litres of rocket fuel through the atmosphere every 5 minutes to show off to their friends and lecturing Africans to go green immediately..."
Read 8 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

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!