Californians are right to feel dismay in this situation. Basic services like electricity should be the norm, despite dry weather and upticks in wind speed. Their ire would be best directed not at PG&E, but at the regulated monopoly model that Californians themselves have maintained through their state government.
Competition and the profit motive will encourage competing utilities to criss-cross the country with a more robust transmission grid, providing safer and cheaper electricity to all.
For the last five years, Alex Epstein's 2014 New York Times bestseller, The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels, has been one of the most important books in the world of energy policy, influencing leading politicians, executives,...
Fonda’s attack on the oil sands is inconsequential; Trudeau’s is evil.
Government-caused uncertainty, such as not approving pipeline construction or imposing more taxes (such as the carbon tax), discourages investment and thus prevents employment recovery.
Telus doesn’t get that its role is the creation of material values (cell phone service), not encouraging more taxation. On the contrary, it should oppose the carbon tax and any other taxes as they destroy human welfare.
Recognizing facts and assessing them by the standard of human flourishing inevitably leads to the conclusion that fossil fuel companies are not villains but producers of essential human value and deserve to be not attacked, but thanked.
“Generation shifting” is not a valid system of emission reduction.
As appeasement and pursuit of ‘social license’ is futile, other oil and pipeline executives should follow Girling’s example and defend their companies on moral grounds for the great value they provide. Governments, for their part, should cease their welfare-destroying climate change policies and focus on protecting individual rights instead.
By co-signing the loan for FirstElement Fuel Inc., the State of California has undermined prospective competition.
Is the premise that catastrophic man-made climate change is happening and that corporations, particularly those involved in producing fossil fuels, are largely culpable, valid?
Individual rights include the freedom to use whichever sources of energy people and businesses want, as long as they don’t violate others’ rights.
Despite the increased use of fossil fuels, toxic pollution has already decreased significantly, and the availability of clean water has increased—thanks to human ingenuity and innovation.
Obama and environmentalists have it in for fossil fuels because they are, overwhelmingly, the form of energy that lifts millions out of poverty and sustains lives longer and healthier than any before.
Most people in industrialized countries take the availability of such energy for granted: we turn on a switch, and the power is there, for heating, cooling, lighting, manufacturing, transportation, and for any other human purpose.
Ethanol is an expensive boondoggle that wouldn’t survive in a competitive market.
The feather in Mr. DiCaprio’s dunce cap is his hypocrisy over fossil fuels — without the energy provided by the fossil fuel companies, the Hollywood film industry could not exist, and DiCaprio could not have had the career and earned wealth he has.
Environmentalism is, at its core, a religious fanaticism against technology, industry and progress.
Based on meticulous research and backed up with solid facts, Epstein makes the case that fossil fuels—coal, oil, and natural gas—have tremendous positive impact on human life.
Alex Epstein’s book “The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels” documents the rapidly shrinking number of human beings killed by storms, floods and other climate events thanks largely to ever-growing industry, fueled mainly by oil, natural gas and coal.
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.
The view that the profit motive is evil and the undefinable goals of “corporate social responsibility” and “environmental sustainability” are noble is the reverse of the truth.
It is about time the oil companies take the high moral ground and tell the world what a crucial value oil and other fossil fuels are to us.
Controversy is heating up over an Obama administration plan to drastically reduce the amount of federal lands available for oil shale development in the American West. The Bush administration had set aside 1.3 million acres for oil shale and tar sands development in...
Voice of Capitalism
Our free email newsletter sent out every week or so.
We respect your privacy. Unsubscribe anytime.