Alex Epstein
What does it mean to be moral? According to Alex Epstein, founder of the Center for Industrial Progress and author of “The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels,” this is a philosophical question. But he will tell you, “An activity is moral if it is fundamentally beneficial to human life.”
“By this standard, the fossil fuel industry is overwhelmingly moral,” Epstein said to attendees of the Independent Petroleum Association of America’s 86th Annual Meeting in New Orleans. “By producing the most abundant, affordable and reliable energy in the world, the fossil fuel industry makes every other industry more productive. The short- and long-term benefits of fossil fuels actually far, far outweigh the risks.”
Epstein, who grew up in Chevy Chase, Maryland, received his bachelor’s degree in philosophy from Duke University. He’s someone who has always been interested in mathematics, science, politics and the humanities. He identifies Ayn Rand as his greatest influence, having been especially captivated by her novel, “Atlas Shrugged.” With an extensive background in moral philosophy, Epstein decided to write “The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels” in 2014, which became a New York Times and Wall Street Journal bestseller. According to Epstein, it was time someone made the moral case for more fossil fuels.
“This book is about morality, about right and wrong,” Epstein said. “To me, the question of what to do about fossil fuels and any other moral issue comes down to: What will promote human life? What will promote human flourishing? How do we maximize the years in our life and the life in our years?”
Epstein shared this thought: Mankind’s use of fossil fuels is supremely virtuous, because human life is the standard of value, and because using fossil fuels transforms our environment to make it wonderful for human life.
Ideas, not facts
Epstein warned there is one fundamental mistake in the case for fossil fuels. This mistake comes from those in the industry who think they’re in a battle of facts when they’re actually in a battle of ideas. If you can change the ideas, you’ll win hearts and minds like never before. According to Epstein, in the case of the Keystone XL pipeline, many regarded the pipeline’s fate due to a battle of facts.
“After Keystone XL was rejected, many supporters asked, ‘Why did no one listen to the facts?’” he said. “This may sound controversial, but the facts by themselves did not matter in the building of Keystone XL. Whether to build or not build Keystone XL depended on the ideas about what’s right and wrong with energy. If it’s considered ‘good’ to get off fossil fuels as quickly as possible, then something like the Keystone XL pipeline is ‘bad.’”
With the war on fossil fuels, opponents are proactive and overwhelming, while advocates are reactive and overwhelmed. Epstein emphasized if you’re defending or championing energy, opponents can be relentless.
“It seems with every energy issue, the industry has to untangle a complete mess of lies and pseudo facts,” Epstein said. “Why aren’t we overwhelming the other side with inspiring pro-energy proposals? Why isn’t the world getting excited about the amazing potential of fossil fuels? For example, the shale energy revolution is the energy opportunity of a lifetime. You can take this useless rock and use it to charge an iPhone or power a car. By having more abundant, cheap and reliable energy, everything in life becomes better and more affordable.”
Humanist vs. environmentalist
Epstein considers himself a humanist and not an environmentalist. He has definitions of the two.
“An environmentalist is someone who puts the environment above human beings,” Epstein explained. “A humanist cares about the environment and wants to improve the planet for human beings.”
Although climate impact is a potential side effect of fossil fuels, Epstein has studied it carefully. He emphasized it’s trivial compared to all the unique benefits of fossil fuels.
“Given how much our culture is focused on the issue of carbon dioxide-induced global warming, it is striking how little warming there has been,” Epstein said. “In the past 80 years, climate-related deaths worldwide fell by an incredible rate of 98 percent. Using fossil fuels doesn’t take a safe climate and make it dangerous; it takes a dangerous climate and makes it far, far safer.”
Epstein also explained there is an incredibly strong correlation between fossil fuel use and life expectancy and between fossil fuel use and income, particularly in the rapidly developing parts of the world such as China and India.
According to Epstein, experts and the media have been making the exact same doom-and-gloom predictions for more than 30 years.
“One expert who now serves as a science adviser to President Barack Obama said 30 years ago it was possible carbon dioxide climate-induced famines could kill as many as a billion people before the year 2020,” Epstein said. “Other predictions stated if we did not dramatically reduce fossil fuel use then and use renewables instead, we would be experiencing catastrophe today. The exact opposite happened. Instead of using a lot less fossil fuel energy, humans are using a lot more.
“Yet, even though life is better than ever, we are wracked with guilt over our industrial development. We hear endlessly our ‘footprint,’ meaning our impact on nature, is too big, and we must ‘go green’ by making a smaller one. We are made to feel bad for the impact we have on land, water, plants or animals. But mastering nature is precisely how human beings survive and flourish. If fossil fuels had a catastrophic climate influence, people should be mourning the prospect of inferior sources of energy, not gleeful at it.”
According to Epstein, fossil fuels burn cleaner and cheaper than ever. They are saving lives in operating rooms, fighting famine, and heating and cooling homes in the most extreme climates.
“Without fossil fuels, society would slide backwards,” he said. “It’s good we use fossil fuels. For example, if we had a ‘green’ attitude on whether to build or not build New York City — one of America’s greatest industrial achievements — that answer would have been thumbs down.”
Progress, progress, progress
Epstein started the Center for Industrial Progress to offer an alternative environmental philosophy to America — one that is antipollution but pro-development. He wants everyone to stop thinking about how to save the planet from human beings and resume thinking about how to improve the planet for human beings.
“Our goal should be to maximize human well-being,” Epstein said. “We can’t only look at the negatives of fossil fuels and the positives of renewables. We have to look at the positives and negatives of everything. If we can get people to agree to this methodology, it will create a framework where the truth will come out, facts can be properly used, and it will be enormously, enormously effective.
“We can’t compromise with this ‘all-of-the-above’ energy policy. The alternative energy sources are inferior products. Fossil fuels are the superior way to improve human life. There is only one way to defeat the environmentalists’ moral case against fossil fuels: refute its central idea that fossil fuels destroy the planet.”
Epstein closed by asserting it’s time to take energy abundance and make it a winning issue focused on human life and progress.
“America has the energy opportunity of a generation to improve our country and billions of lives,” he said. “Fossil fuels make the planet dramatically safer and richer in resources.”
For more information, visit www.moralcaseforfossilfuels.com or www.alexepstein.com.
