The Irrefutable Case For A Fossil-Fueled Future

If we want a world in which all 8 billion of us have the opportunity to flourish—to live long, healthy, prosperous, fulfilling lives—we need more, not less, fossil fuels.

I explain this comprehensively in my book Fossil Future. Here’s a summary of my case, the principles it is based on, and the facts that support it. [bold, links added]

• Why do I believe the world needs to increase fossil fuel use when so many tell us to rapidly eliminate fossil fuel use? Because it flows from 3 irrefutable principles for thinking about fossil fuels that I, as a philosopher and energy expert, follow—and most “experts” don’t.
• My 3 irrefutable principles for thinking about fossil fuels, which no opponent has ever challenged:

1. Factor in fossil fuels’ benefits
2. Factor in fossil fuels’ “climate mastery benefits”
3. Factor in fossil fuels’ negative and positive climate side-effects with precision

• Irrefutable principle 1: Factor in fossil fuels’ benefits
  When we’re evaluating what to do about any technology we must factor in not only its negative side-effects but also its benefits.E.g., oil-powered equipment and natural gas fertilizer are crucial to feeding 8 billion people.
• Even though we obviously need to factor in fossil fuels’ benefits, not just their negative side-effects, most designated experts totally fail to do this.E.g., “expert” Michael Mann 100% ignores fossil fuels’ unique agricultural benefits in his book on fossil fuels and climate.
• Irrefutable principle 2: Factor in fossil fuels’ “climate mastery benefits” One huge benefit we get from fossil fuels is the ability to master climate danger—e.g., fossil-fueled cooling, heating, irrigation—which can potentially neutralize fossil fuels’ negative climate impacts.
• Even though we obviously need to factor in fossil fuels’ climate mastery benefits, our designated experts totally fail to do this.E.g., the UN IPCC’s multi-thousand page reports totally omit fossil-fueled climate mastery! That’s like a polio report omitting the polio vaccine.
• Irrefutable principle 3: Factor in fossil fuels’ negative and positive climate side-effects with precision With rising CO2 we must consider both negatives (more heatwaves) and positives (fewer cold deaths). And we must be precise, not equating some impact with a huge impact.
• Even though we obviously need to factor in both negative and positive impacts of rising CO2 with precision, most designated experts ignore big positives (e.g., global greening) while catastrophizing negatives (e.g., Gore portrays 20 ft sea level rise as imminent when extreme UN projections are 3ft/100yrs).
• If you follow my 3 irrefutable principles for thinking about fossil fuels—factoring in fossil fuels’ 1) benefits, 2) climate mastery benefits, and 3) precise negative and positive climate side-effects—the facts show that we need a Fossil Future. Consider 10 undeniable facts
  👇

FIVE undeniable facts about fossil fuel’s benefits:

1. Human flourishing requires cost-effective energy
2. Far more energy is needed
3. Fossil fuels are uniquely cost-effective
4. Unreliable solar and wind are failing to replace fossil fuels
5. Fossil fuels give us an incredible climate mastery ability

• Undeniable energy fact 1: Cost-effective energy is essential to human flourishing
  Cost-effective energy—affordable, reliable, versatile, scalable energy—is essential to human flourishing because gives us the ability to use machines to become productive and prosperous.
• Thanks to today’s unprecedented availability of cost-effective energy (mostly fossil fuel) the world has never been a better place for human life. Life expectancy and income have been skyrocketing, with extreme poverty (<$2/day) plummeting from 42% in 1980 to <10% today.1

Undeniable energy fact 2: The world needs much more energy

Billions of people lack the cost-effective energy they need to flourish. Three billion use less electricity than a typical American refrigerator. 1/3 of the world uses wood/dung for heating/cooking. Much more energy is needed. 2

• The desperate lack of life-giving, cost-effective energy means that any replacement for fossil fuels must not only provide energy to the 2B who use significant amounts of energy today but to the 6B who use far less. Restricting fossil fuels without incredible alternatives is mass murder.
• Undeniable energy fact 3: Fossil fuels are uniquely cost-effective
  Despite 100+ years of aggressive competition, fossil fuels provide 80%+ of the world’s energy and they are still growing fast—especially in the countries most concerned with cost-effective energy. E.g., China.3
• Fossil fuels are uniquely able to provide energy that’s low-cost, reliable, and versatile on a scale of billions of people. This is due to fossil fuels’ combo of remarkable attributes—fossil fuels are naturally stored, concentrated, and abundant energy—and generations of innovation by industry.
• There is currently only one energy tech that can match (actually exceed) fossil fuels’ combo of naturally stored, concentrated, abundant energy: nuclear. Nuclear may one day outcompete all uses of fossil fuels, but this will take radical policy reform and generations of innovation + work.
• Recent price spikes in fossil fuels do not reflect some new lack of cost-effectiveness on the part of fossil fuels, but rather the devastating effects of “green energy” efforts to artificially restrict the supply of fossil fuels on the false promise that unreliable solar/wind can replace them.
• Undeniable energy fact 4: Unreliable solar/wind are failing to replace fossil fuels Despite claims that solar + wind are rapidly replacing fossil fuels, they provide < 5% of world energy—only electricity, ⅕ of energy—and even that depends on huge subsidies and reliable (mostly fossil-fueled) power plants.4
• Solar and wind’s basic problem is unreliability, to the point they can go near-0 at any time. Thus they don’t replace reliable power, they parasite on it. This is why they need huge subsidies and why no grid is near 50% solar/wind without huge parasitism on reliable neighbors.5
• The popular idea that we can use mostly or all solar/wind with sufficient battery backup is not being tried anywhere because it’s economically absurd. Batteries are so expensive that just 3 days of global backup using Elon Musk’s Megapacks would cost $400T, >4X global GDP. 6
• For solar/wind to rapidly replace fossil fuels would require magically, immediately fixing their intractable problems by providing electricity, then providing the 4/5 of world energy that isn’t electricity, then doing that for the world’s far greater energy needs going forward.
• Unfortunately, there are opportunistic anti-fossil-fuel activist academics who have been feeding the absurd fantasy of rapid global replacement of fossil fuels via unreliable solar and wind. These academics are squarely responsible for today’s global crisis of insufficient fossil fuel supply.
• All academic schemes to replace fossil fuels with mostly solar/wind share 3 absurd assumptions:

1) schemes never tried anywhere will cheaply work everywhere the 1st time
2) a crash program of unprecedented mining will be cheap
3) today’s anti-development politics won’t slow anything down

• Bottom line: If we recognize the undeniable facts about energy, we must conclude that if 8 billion people are going to have the cost-effective energy they need to flourish, in the far greater quantities needed, fossil fuel use needs to increase. Rapidly restricting it is deadly, period.
• The life-or-death benefits of fossil fuels to the ability of 8 billion people to flourish are true regardless of how severe the negative climate side effects of fossil fuels are. Those who think fossil fuels’ CO2 emissions are apocalyptic still should acknowledge that rapid fossil fuel elimination is apocalyptic.
• Those of us who recognize the benefits of fossil fuels should be open to evidence of extremely negative climate side-effects of fossil fuels. But once we learn certain undeniable facts about fossil fuels’ climate benefits and side effects the idea of climate apocalypse is totally refuted.