Myth: Fossil fuels have made the planet less livable.

Truth: Fossil fuels have made the planet incomparably more livable, by fueling an unprecedented increase in humanity’s productive ability.

(A summary of Fossil Future Ch 4, part 1 of 3)

🧵👇 The Full Benefits of Continuing Fossil Fuel Use

To properly evaluate fossil fuels, we need to understand their full benefits and side-effects.

It's crucial to start with their benefits, since these can often be used to neutralize and overwhelm their negative side-effects.

Myth: Elon Musk opposes all EV subsidies.

Truth: Elon, through Tesla, has been one of America's biggest advocates of direct and indirect EV subsidies—and of punishments for Tesla's competitors.

🧵👇 Elon Musk likes to tell us that he is against all energy subsidies, including EV subsidies.

Yet the company he runs is one of America's biggest and most successful advocates of EV subsidies.

What gives?

Why are leading institutions so biased against fossil fuels?

Because their operating “anti-impact framework” causes them to view fossil fuels, which are inherently high impact, as intrinsically immoral and inevitably self-destructive.

A summary of Fossil Future, Chapter 3 🧵👇 An Anti-Human Moral Goal and Standard

Our knowledge system’s opposition to fossil fuels while ignoring their enormous benefits can only be explained by it operating on an anti-human moral goal and standard of evaluation that regards benefits to human life as morally unimportant.

LCOE must die.

If you ever hear anyone favorably compare solar and wind to coal, gas, or nuclear by citing a low LCOE—"Levelized Cost of Energy"—you are being scammed.

LCOE explicitly ignores "reliability-related considerations" and is therefore a garbage metric. 🧵👇 You've heard it over and over: "Solar and wind are now cheaper than fossil fuels."

You might suspect something is wrong here, because if solar/wind were so cheap their developers wouldn't always be asking for subsidies, or claim the sky is falling when subsidies are taken away.

Our “knowledge system”—the people and institutions we rely upon to research, synthesize, disseminate, and evaluate expert knowledge—consistently ignores the massive, life-or-death benefits of fossil fuels.

A summary of Fossil Future, Chapter 1 🧵👇 Save the World With…Fossil Fuels?

I am going to try to persuade you of something that might seem impossible: that one of the best things you can do to make the world a better place is to fight for more fossil fuel use—more use of oil, coal, and natural gas.

Apple, Google, Meta and hundreds of other companies claim be "100% renewable" while using mostly fossil fuel electricity.

How is this possible?

Because an FTC rule called the "Green Guides" lets them buy so-called "credits" to count others' solar and wind use as their own. 🧵👇 No significant US company is close to being "100% renewable," since all such companies rely on the mostly fossil fuel electricity grid.

But in 2012, the Obama FTC rewrote a guidance document called the "Green Guides" to let companies falsely claim to be "100% renewable" anyway.

Senate fails to terminate Green New Scam

The Senate bill *looks like* it has a 2027 "placed in service" cutoff for new solar/wind subsidies.

But one last-minute paragraph makes it worthless—because projects making a recoverable 5% investment in the next 12 months are exempt!

The idea of a 2027 "placed in service" cutoff was that new subsidies would actually end during the Trump administration.

But under the last-minute carveout, Big Green has 12 months to initiate as many subsidized projects as it wants using the insanely-easy-to-meet "construction" threshold. (All you need to do is commit 5% of expected project cost to buying re-sellable assets like solar panels.)

Once they declare "construction"—e.g., in July 2026—they'll have 4 years (e.g., July 2030) to "place in service." And then some of those projects, e.g., most wind projects, will get 10 years of subsidies.

So we'll still have wind subsidies on Donald Trump's 94th birthday!

Here's how much worse the Senate bill just got:
* Two days ago: "Placed in service" by 12-31-27—with new subsidized solar/wind projects stopping very quickly, and Trump being able to let subsidies truly end.

* Today: "Placed in service" by JULY 2030—with new subsidized solar/wind projects absolutely spamming the rid and ripping off taxpayers like never before, and Trump having no control over whether the subsidies end.

The current Senate bill is arguably worse than the original Senate Finance one. At least that bill decreased solar/wind subsidies starting in 2026 to 60%. The current bill just increased them to 100%.

The current bill is a solar/wind lobbyist's dream. It does not terminate the Green New Scam in any way, shape or form. It absolutely perpetuates it. And offensively so, I might add, by keeping the "placed in service" cutoff language so many people courageously fought for, then totally undoing it with a single last-minute paragraph that makes it worthless.

If the Senate wanted to extend the Green New Scam it should have said so, not insulted our intelligence by trying to bury the extension in one sneaky little paragraph.

PS Several Senators have already told me they didn't know about or understand this last-minute paragraph. If that's the case they should do whatever they can to fix the situation. And just to be clear, NOTHING good will come out of extending the Green New Scam.

https://x.com/AlexEpstein/status/1939785525155844274

Dear US Senators,

Here is a refutation of every lobbyist lie that more solar/wind subsidies are good for electricity.

FACT: SUBSIDIES HAVE PROVABLY REDUCED CAPACITY + RELIABILITY—AND INCREASED PRICES.

More subsidies can only make things worse.

Vote against extending them!

⚡️ Senators are deluged by lobbyists who say solar/wind subsidies have been great for America—and that the Senate needs to pass @joniernst's amendment to extend them.

But the Administration's top experts know the truth: these subsidies are a disaster the Senate needs to terminate.

Republicans ran on a pledge to "terminate" the trillion-dollar Inflation Reduction Act subsidies, aka "the Green New Scam."

But their proposed budget keeps almost all the subsidies, while falsely claiming to save money through easily-reversed “phaseouts” starting in 4 years!
🧵 If you’re just joining the conversation about the IRA subsidies, here’s what you need to know: they are subsidies for inferior forms of energy that cost a fortune, raise energy costs, and make our grid unreliable—especially the solar/wind subsidies.

https://twitter.com/32913997/status/1915816725062341102

Canada has 3X the US’s oil reserves but less than 40% the production.

Why? Anti-oil politicians like Mark Carney who say they’re protecting Earth’s coldest country from global warming.

Here's the story of Canada's squandered oil opportunity—and how to reverse it 🇨🇦👇 *Canada has the greatest oil opportunity on Earth: > 3 times the reserves of the US, with lower production costs.*

Canada has 170 billion barrels of proven oil reserves—by far the largest of any free country. And its producers can profit at $44 oil, vs. >$57 for US shale.

Canadian oil production is also continuing to get cheaper. Oil sands operating costs have dropped 19% over the past five years, and the industry—which is still fine-tuning how to coax oil-like bitumen out of oil sands—has substantial room for further cost reductions.

In addition to its massive proven oil reserves, Canada also has massive unexplored oil resources. Canada’s Northwest Territories may contain up to 37% of Canada’s total oil reserves, much of it light crude, which is even cheaper to extract and transport than bitumen from oil sands.

Why Congress's new budget should eliminate all IRA "tax credits"

1. They are subsidies
2. They promote inferior energy
3. They raise energy costs
4. They make energy unreliable
5. They increase our debt
6. They make our economy less productive
7. They don't lower CO2 emissions *Truth 1: IRA energy tax credits are really just subsidies*

Real tax credits let productive industries keep/reinvest more of their profits.

Most IRA "tax credits" are transferable tax reduction certificates that unprofitable industries trade for cash. I.e., subsidies.

A tax credit lets productive industries pay less tax on profits, which enables them to reinvest in additional productivity.

But most IRA "tax credits" support activities that are unprofitable on a free market—e.g., solar, wind, hydrogen—and therefore have no taxes to reduce with credits.

How can unprofitable activities be set to get a trillion dollars in IRA "tax credits"?

Because they are aren't really tax credits but *transferable tax reduction certificates* that can be easily sold for cash to profitable companies (and sometimes the government itself).

Giving a trillion dollars in transferable tax cut certificates to unprofitable activities that pay no taxes is no different than giving transferable tax reduction certificates to individuals who pay no taxes.

It's a trillion dollar subsidy, not a tax credit.

⚠️ WARNING: The secret UN carbon tax that's about to fleece America

Next week, the UN votes on an ocean carbon tax that would spike the price of food, fuel, and everyday essentials—hitting US the hardest.

Here's what the admin and Congress can do to stop this in its tracks👇🧵 The UN's International Maritime Organization (IMO) is supposed to ensure safe shipping around the world.

Instead, it's pushing a carbon tax on shipping fuel, with proposals ranging from $19 to $150/ton of CO2—the equivalent of adding $1.29 to the price of gasoline!

Did the EPA really just take the "Biggest Deregulatory Action in U.S. History"?

Actually, yes.

Here are 18 important deregulatory actions EPA announced today, and why they will make life better for all of us.

🧵👇

https://twitter.com/1882543731179495424/status/1899893191974826172

1. "Reconsideration of regulations on power plants (Clean Power Plan 2.0)"

These Biden regs would effectively ban all coal plants and new natgas plants by demanding impossible 90% carbon capture.

Reconsidering them is essential to preserving the grid and unleashing electricity.

Amazing news: @EPA is challenging the single most destructive regulatory action in US history: the "endangerment finding."

This bogus "finding" allowed Obama/Biden to ban gas cars, shut down power plants, slow US oil growth, and lock up our limitless natural gas.

Full story 👇

https://twitter.com/14615871/status/1899886322342416685

Ever wonder why the Biden EPA was able to become an economic dictator, prohibiting most Americans from buying a gas car after 2032 and effectively banning all coal plants and new natgas plants after 2039?

It started with the Obama EPA's bogus "endangerment finding."

It may seem impossible, but 4 years from now America can have

1. Record oil and gas production

2. Cheap, plentiful, reliable electricity

3. High environmental quality

4. Low climate danger

5. A nuclear renaissance

Here are the 25 policy changes that will get us there.

👇 1: Unleash responsible development on federal lands/waters

Anti-development policies prevent us from tapping enormous energy reserves on federal lands/waters.

Responsible development can unlock the full energy potential of ¼ of the US (!) while protecting environmental quality.

COP 29 is immoral

COP 29 seeks net-zero—rapidly eliminating fossil fuels—in the name of protecting us from climate danger.

In reality, net-zero would radically increase climate danger and ruin billions of lives.

Good people should condemn COP and embrace energy freedom. 🧵👇 The COP 29 climate conference has a consistent theme: previous COPs have done an okay job of restricting fossil fuels in the name of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but this one needs to eliminate fossil fuel use far faster so as to reach net-zero by 2050.

This is 180° wrong.

Myth: Hurricanes Helene and Milton show that we’re experiencing unprecedented danger from extreme weather thanks to fossil fuels.

Truth: Fossil fuels have made us much safer from extreme weather—and the recent hurricanes would’ve been far worse without them. 🧵👇 Media reports would lead us to believe that hurricanes like Helene and Milton are proof that fossil-fueled “climate change” is making extreme weather much more dangerous by virtue of being more intense and/or frequent. Mainstream data and climate science show otherwise.

The costs of Biden-Harris's "government-dictated green energy" policies have been enormous so far, would have been catastrophic if not for their opponents' resistance, and will be apocalyptic if not stopped in the future.

My testimony to the Budget Committee (video below) 🧵👇 Watch my testimony here:

Media myth: Fossil fuels are making Texas, the capital of fossil fuels, more endangered by heat.

Truth: Fossil fuels have made Texas far safer than ever from climate, both from heat and the far more dangerous cold—but anti-fossil-fuel policies are stalling that progress. 🧵👇 A recent WSJ article portrays Texas as threatened by fossil-fueled climate warming. But as evidence, they point to just 200 additional heat deaths that can’t be traced back to climate change, while ignoring the overall decline in climate deaths that fossil fuels helped cause.

Myth: @KamalaHarris used to be for banning fracking, but now she supports fracking.

Truth: Kamala Harris is still for banning fracking—because she is still for the *net-zero agenda that requires banning fracking* along with all other fossil fuel activities. 🧵👇 Kamala Harris, who in 2019 said, “There is no question I am in favor of banning fracking,” now tells voters in fracking-dependent states like PA that she is no longer wants to ban fracking.

They shouldn’t believe her, since Harris’s net-zero agenda *requires* banning fracking.

Electricity rates have risen 47% faster than the CPI the last 12 months, and nearly 24% overall since the Biden-Harris administration began.

High electricity bills are the result of government-dictated green energy schemes. 🧵👇 As Americans struggle with rising summer electricity bills, it’s important to know that this struggle was 100% unnecessary and 100% preventable.