The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels

by Alex Epstein

  Unfortunately, the fossil fuel industry has not refuted the moral case against fossil fuels. In fact, the vast majority of its communications reinforce the moral case against fossil fuels.

  For example, take the common practice of publicly endorsing renewables as the ideal. Fossil fuel companies, particularly oil and gas companies, proudly feature windmills on Web pages and annual reports, even though these are trivial to their bottom line and wildly uneconomic. This obviously implies that renewables are the goal, oil and gas being a temporarily necessary evil.

  Another way in which the fossil fuel industry reinforces the moral case against itself is by trying to sidestep the issue with talk of jobs or economics or patriotism. While these are important issues, it makes no sense to pursue them via fossil fuels if they are destroying our planet. That’s why environmentalists compellingly respond with arguments such as: Do we want economic growth tied to poison? Do we want more jobs where the workers are causing harm? Do we want our national identity to continue to be associated with something we now know is destructive?

  There are many, many more forms of conceding the environmentalists’ moral case and giving them the high ground. Here are half a dozen more just to give you a sense of the scope of the problem.

  Not mentioning the word “oil” on home pages (this has at times been true of ExxonMobil, Shell, and Chevron). This implies that you’re ashamed of what you do and that your critics are right that oil is a self-destructive addiction.

  Focusing attention on everything but your core product—community service initiatives, charitable contributions, et cetera. This implies that you’re ashamed of your core product.

  Praising your attackers as “idealistic.” This implies that those who want your destruction are pursuing a legitimate ideal.

  Apologizing for your “environmental footprint.” This implies that there’s something wrong with the industrial development that is inherent in energy production.

  Spending most of your time on the defensive. This implies that you don’t have something positive to champion.

  Criticizing your opponents primarily for getting their facts wrong without refuting their basic moral argument. This implies that the argument is right but your opponents just need to identify your evils more precisely.

  The industry’s position amounts to this: “Our product isn’t moral, but it’s something that we will need for some time as we transition to the ideal fossil fuel–free future.” What you’re telling the world is that you are a necessary evil. And because the environmentalists agree that it will take some time to transition to a fossil fuel–free future, the argument amounts to a debate over an expiration date. Environmentalists will argue that fossil fuels are necessary for a shorter time, and you’ll argue that they’re necessary for a longer time, so they’ll always sound optimistic and idealistic, and you’ll always sound cynical and pessimistic and self-serving. So long as you concede that your product is a self-destructive addiction, you will not win hearts and minds—and you will not deserve to.

  In my experience, whatever the audience and whatever the medium, making the moral case for the fossil fuel industry is a game changer. We need you to make that case—for your sake and ours. I believe that if enough of us work together applying these ideas, the unimaginable is possible. In the future, I see:

  Pro–fossil fuel politicians winning spectacular victories over anti–fossil fuel politicians in debates.

  Energy companies having inspiring, iconic campaigns that make them as cool as iPhones.

  Workforces full of incredibly educated, motivated, articulate ambassadors.

  Associations training members in moral communication.

  News stories with quotes by morally confident, persuasive CEOs.

  Web sites having more emotional resonance than the Greenpeace or Sierra Club Web sites.

  Widespread criticism of anyone who delays a pipeline for five years, not as proenvironment but as antiprogress.

  A new generation of intellectuals who are passionate advocates of fossil fuels.

  College campuses where students are not afraid to say, “I love fossil fuels.”

  I wrote this letter as part of an effort of mine in the last several years to convince the fossil fuel industry to make a moral case for its work. Historically, it has been a major bankroller of Green organizations. For example, between 2007 and 2010, the natural gas industry gave $25 million to the Sierra Club.19 I’ve told them, in effect, “How am I supposed to fight for the freedom to use your product if you won’t?” I’m happy it’s started working, and I now spend quite a bit of my time working with companies to improve their communications. It’s in their self-interest, because they can get projects approved quickly if they actually explain the value of what they do. For me, the prospect of getting the resources of the industry deployed to actually make a compelling case is beyond exciting. Because I am a capitalist and charge for my services, maybe I will get attacked now for being paid by the fossil fuel industry. But there’s the prejudice again. Why would someone assume that someone who works with fossil fuel companies is corrupt, while those who, say, accept government grants aren’t? As I advise members of the industry on what to say, I don’t say this industry is good because I work with it; I work with this industry because I think it’s good.

  The fossil fuel industry has a giant megaphone it can use to influence for good or bad. It’s in everyone’s interest for it to use it for good.

  WHAT WE ALL MUST DO

  In 2007 and 2008, candidate Obama declared his intention to destroy fossil fuel energy in America and around the world, calling for “emissions targets” that would make it illegal to use more than 20 percent of today’s levels.20 About oil, the most versatile fuel in the world, which powers 93 percent of our transportation system and, through shale-oil booms in North Dakota, Texas, and elsewhere, has been one of our few sources of economic hope, he said:

  At the dawn of the twenty-first century, the country that faced down the tyranny of fascism and communism is now called to challenge the tyranny of oil. . . . For the sake of our security, our economy, our jobs and our planet, the age of oil must end in our time.21

  While he was saying this, the oil industry he was comparing to the mass murderers of the twentieth century was perfecting shale-oil (and shale-gas) technology. Thanks to Obama’s lack of oversight in this area, shale energy technology became the leading positive economic force during his administration.

  That is, a revolution in fossil fuel technology occurred because our government didn’t know enough about it to demonize and ban it. This is not the kind of thing we want to depend on.

  What if Obama had been aware of this revolution in the making ten years out? He would have no doubt regarded it as a dangerous practice to be stopped, given that he viewed oil as a “tyranny” to be ended, not expanded. Technological progress in the United States would have been thwarted—and with it, progress around the world. The United States is the best place in the world to do fossil fuel research and development, because we have the most private property that can be bought and explored, rather than delegated at the whim of the state.

  This example to me captures where we are—incredible threats to progress and incredible opportunities for progress. We are still arguably at the beginning of the fossil fuel age. In several decades we may be able to drill efficiently and safely at any depth, efficiently turn coal or gas into oil, and use fossil fuels to help develop new generations of technology (likely nuclear) and help increase the amount of the most valuable resources—food, water, beauty, and most important, human time. All indications are that, as the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere increases from .04 percent to .05 or .06 percent, we will continue to benefit from more plant growth. If new climate dynamics are discovered, we will adapt—always keeping in mind as full context the indispensable value of industrial civilization.

  We can have
it all.

  We just need to be clear on what is right, then take the time and sometimes social risk to try to reach the people who matter most to us. I wrote this book so you could hand it to the people who matter most to you—and so that you could take its ideas and make them your own, telling the people who matter to you how you think and feel.

  I wrote this book for anyone who wants to make the world a better place—for human beings—including many, many people who would start this book opposed to or at least suspicious of fossil fuels. Having held that position myself before, I know it can be well motivated. The idea of ruining the world for the less fortunate and, even worse, for our children or grandchildren is horrifying to us. Thus, when someone tells us of a major risk that our behavior is causing, we want to do something about it.

  What we are not taught is that the biggest risk is not using fossil fuels, and that using them is incredibly virtuous. We are not taught that we’re building a civilization that serves us and the future, that we’re creating knowledge and resources that can enrich everyone around the world. We’re not taught that the choices we make often reflect an extremely rational calculation that balances benefit and risk. We’re not taught that some people truly believe that human life doesn’t matter, and that their goal is not to help us triumph over nature’s obstacles but to remove us as an obstacle to the rest of nature.

  Make no mistake—there are people trying to use you to promote actions that would harm everything you care about. Not because they care about you—they prioritize nature over you—but because they see you as a tool.

  The unpopular but moral cause of our time is fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are easy to misunderstand and demonize, but they are absolutely good to use. And they absolutely need to be championed.

  There are many specific battles to be fought. The venue and strategy for each is ever changing, which is why the specific actions we take need to be timely and coordinated. That’s why this book has a Web site, www.moralcaseforfossilfuels.com, which will let you know about the latest opportunities to fight for energy liberation, whether it’s promoting a series of debates over fossil fuels, writing a public comment on the EPA’s attacks on coal, or sharing inspiring stories about industrial progress around the world.

  But no matter what you read, the need for moral clarity will always be timely. Here, in a sentence, is the moral case for fossil fuels, the single thought that can empower us to empower the world: 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.

  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

  One theme of this book is the importance of using experts the right way. If we can use the best experts as advisers and get them to clearly share what they know and how they know it, our understanding will be far better.

  That was certainly true for the creation of this book. It was enormously improved by numerous experts and other talented people who helped me in every aspect.

  Philosopher Greg Salmieri helped me clarify my thinking about practically every issue in this book, thanks to his ruthlessly precise thinking and original insights about everything from the proper way to deal with experts to how to structure the book.

  Steffen Henne, our lead researcher at the Center for Industrial Progress, helped me find the high-quality and wide-ranging data I was looking for. Steffen’s breadth of knowledge about practically every topic in this book is incredible, as is his ability to catch errors.

  David Epstein, the best expert at synthesizing and graphing data I have ever met, also, fortunately for me, happens to be my father. Almost every image in this book is produced by his proprietary software, G3, which is a stupendously powerful tool for synthesizing a multiplicity of data sets and then displaying them visually. Thanks also to graphic designer Marianne Epstein (another fortuitous relation), who helped with design across the board.

  Alex Hrin, my friend and a trained biophysicist who has a wide array of scientific and technological knowledge, helped me greatly in formulating many of the sections on climate and environmental impact.

  Don Watkins, my longtime friend and colleague, provided essential editing and feedback at every stage. Don has a remarkable ability to candidly communicate all the problems with my writing but simultaneously motivate me with his enthusiasm about what the final product will be.

  Maria Gagliano, my editor at Portfolio, defied all expectations, improving every section and paragraph she commented on by being, as she put it, “your toughest critic.” In an age when editors are known to be “light touch,” I was lucky to have one who put in the time to make every page better.

  I got many helpful comments and ideas from others. CIP Senior Fellow Eric Dennis, a formally trained physicist and self-trained economist, was ever insightful about both climate and economic issues. My friend Chad Morris gave me dozens of suggestions and criticisms, and the book benefited from every one of them. My friend Jesse McCarthy, a master storyteller, helped me make the ideas in this book more powerful and more visual. The members of CIP’s “Talent Factory” training program, which includes experts in everything from chemical engineering to petroleum engineering, provided dozens of good ideas and clarifications.

  My mentor Dennis Farrier helped me create an overall vision for the book. He, along with Lisa VanDamme, Aaron Briley, Johnny Saba, Ruth Epstein, Robert Bradley Jr., and many other friends and family, gave me continual moral support—as did the thousands of supporters of the Center for Industrial Progress, who are a nonstop source of fuel.

  Every project needs a project manager and I am grateful to CIP’s Erin Connors for making sure that all the pieces got done when they needed to. Erin’s genuine enthusiasm for the project and active desire to make it as good as possible led her to help out in practically every aspect—from conducting research to finding powerful stories to catching unclarity to rigorously making sure every citation was right.

  I also want to acknowledge the intellectual influences whose ideas led me to be able to write this book in the first place. This book would not have been possible without clear thinking about standards of value, which I got (among many other philosophical identifications) from Ayn Rand; without a proper understanding of resources, which I learned from the works of economists Julian Simon and George Reisman; and without extensive knowledge of energy, which I obtained first and foremost from the works of Petr Beckmann. Perhaps the person who has helped me the most over the years in thinking through these issues is my former colleague, philosopher Onkar Ghate, who is a master at questioning conventional ways of framing issues and then coming up with far better ones.

  Finally, I must thank the person without whom this book would not exist: my agent, Wes Neff. Wes contacted me out of the blue after reading an essay of mine called “The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels,” and told me he thought it contained new and important ideas that deserved a hearing—and that he, as president of one of America’s leading agencies, would put his time and his name behind. I have never met an agent with his genuine enthusiasm for new ideas. And thanks to his efforts, I got to do this book with Portfolio / Penguin, my number one choice for a publisher. And it was the right choice; from beginning to end and top to bottom everyone at Portfolio has been a pleasure to work with.

  Finally, I’d like to thank the people who work in the fossil fuel industry. I came to this industry as a complete outsider—I had been writing about it for years before I knew more than five people in it—but it has been gratifying to meet and even befriend many members of the industry. Every day, you are working to make sure that everything in our lives works. I hope that this book makes more people appreciate that, and I hope that this book makes you better able to appreciate that.

  SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

  Boden, T. A., G. Marland, and R. J. Andres, “Global, Regional, and National Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions.” Carbon Dioxide Information A
nalysis Center (CDIAC), Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 2013. doi:10.3334/CDIAC/00001_V2013.

  Bolt, J., and J. L. van Zanden, “The First Update of the Maddison Project; Re-Estimating Growth Before 1820.” Maddison Project Working Paper 4. Accessed June 8, 2014. http://www.ggdc.net/maddison/maddison-project/home.htm.

  BP. Statistical Review of World Energy 2013. “Historical Data Workbook.” Accessed May 20, 2014. http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/about-bp/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html.

  Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center. U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge, Tennessee. http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/trends/co2/lawdome.smoothed.yr20.

  Christy, John C. Climate Model Output from KNMI Climate Explorer using sources referenced in chart. University of Alabama—Huntsville.

  “Coal-Fired Power Plant Hamm.” ALPINE Bau GmbH. Accessed July 10, 2014. http://www.alpine.at/en/bereiche/kraftwerksbau/steinkohl e-kraftwerk-hammsteinkohle-kraftwerk-hamm/.

  “Commodity Food Price Index.” Index Mundi. Accessed on July 12, 2014. http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=food- price-index.

  EM-DAT: The OFDA/CRED International Disaster Database. Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium. Accessed May 3, 2014. http://www.emdat.be.

  Etheridge, D.M., et al., “Historical CO2 Records from the Law Dome DE08, DE08-2, and DSS Ice Cores.” Trends: A Compendium of Data on Global Change (June 1998).

  European Energy Exchange AG, Leipzig, Germany. “Transparency Platform Data.” Accessed on July 9, 2014.