Is There a Moral Case for Fossil Fuels? with Alex Epstein

SHOW NOTES:
https://www.whatbitcoindid.com/podcast/is-there-a-moral-case-for-fossil-fuels

Alex Epstein is a philosopher and author of ‘The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels’ and ‘Fossil Future’. In this interview, we discuss how energy abundance has enabled humans to flourish, whether climate mastery has made us unnaturally safe, and the need for more low-cost reliable energy.

THIS EPISODE’S SPONSORS:
Gemini - https://www.gemini.com/
BlockFi - https://blockfi.com/peter
Sportsbet.io - https://sportsbet.io/?ref=wbd
Casa - https://keys.casa/?pk_campaign=wbd-yearly-sponsor&pk_medium=sponsorship&pk_source=what-bitcoin-did
Ledger - https://www.ledger.com/
Compass Mining - https://compassmining.io/
BCB Group - https://hubs.ly/Q011cb730
LVL - https://www.lvl.co/wbd

TIMESTAMPS:
00:00:00 Introduction
00:07:25 Knowledge systems, lack of debate
00:27:59 Human flourishing, fossil fuel capacity
00:37:59 Access to reliable energy, impact on environment
01:02:58 Need for fossil fuels and freedom
01:08:51 Implications of climate change
01:17:16 Sea level changes
01:33:50 Social costs for poorer nations who have burned less fossil fuels
01:42:42 Flooding, crop failures and climate mastery
01:54:26 Relative economics of energy

WHERE TO FIND THE SHOW:
→ My website: https://www.whatbitcoindid.com/podcast/
→ iTunes: https://apple.co/2OOlzVV
→ Spotify: https://spoti.fi/2ygc4W1
→ Stitcher: https://bit.ly/2IQO8fX
→ SoundCloud: https://bit.ly/2CGSVQR
→ YouTube: https://bit.ly/3nyi9Ez
→ TuneIn: https://bit.ly/2ywystr

LISTEN TO OLD EPISODES:
→ By guest: https://www.whatbitcoindid.com/guests/
→ By topic: https://www.whatbitcoindid.com/topics/
→ Transcriptions: https://www.whatbitcoindid.com/transcriptions/

SUPPORT THE SHOW:
→ https://www.whatbitcoindid.com/sponsorship/
→ Become a Patron: https://www.patreon.com/whatbitcoindid/
→ Subscribe on iTunes
→ Leave a review on iTunes
→ Share the show out with your friends and family on social media
→ Drop me a line on [email protected]

WHERE TO FOLLOW ME:
→ Twitter: https://twitter.com/whatbitcoindid/
→ Medium: https://medium.com/@whatbitcoindid/
→ Instagram: http://instagram.com/whatbitcoindid/
→ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/whatbitcoindid/
→ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/whatbitcoindidpodcast
→ Website: https://www.whatbitcoindid.com/
→ Email list: https://www.whatbitcoindid.com/subscribe/

LEARN ABOUT BITCOIN:
→ Step by Step Guide: https://www.whatbitcoindid.com/beginners-guide
→ Training: https://www.whatbitcoindid.com/training/
→ Resources: https://www.whatbitcoindid.com/resources/

#Bitcoin #Finance #Economics

****

“If you have any influence on a situation, and you’re using that influence to prevent or discourage low cost, reliable energy, I think you’re contributing to the life catastrophe that is widespread poverty.”
— Alex Epstein

Alex Epstein is a philosopher and author of ‘The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels’ and ‘Fossil Future’. In this interview, we discuss how energy abundance has enabled humans to flourish, whether climate mastery has made us unnaturally safe, and the need for more low-cost reliable energy.

- - - -

According to a recent survey for the UN, 64% of people believe that climate change is a global emergency. News reports are dominated by stories of floods, heatwaves, droughts, hurricanes and other events, highlighted as potential signs of a warming world. The implicit assumption is that urgent reductions in the use of fossil fuels are required to minimise the potential impacts.

But increasingly, a growing collective is questioning these opinions. Exploitation of fossil fuels is linked to civilisations' rapid development in the 250 years since the industrial revolution. Yet, billions still lack access to adequate levels of energy. The concern is alternative energy sources won’t be able to meet current demands, let alone demands that aren’t currently being met.

Furthermore, there is scepticism regarding climate change projections and forecast impacts on societies. Those who hold such views are labelled as climate change ‘deniers’, a pejorative term meant to imply resistance to science and facts. This is emblematic of how combative and polarised the two sides of the debate have become. Some are now refusing to engage.

Perhaps, such division is understandable given the stakes. If global warming has the capacity to be an existential threat this century, then delays in curtailing fossil fuels could be catastrophic. Equally, if such warnings turn out to be wrong then we could be constraining the empowerment of billions of people. In our view, this is why we should remain engaged in the debate.