Why Not *Nuclear Future*?
Why Alex Epstein didn't write a different book.
When I urge STEM friends to read Fossil Future, one of the most common reactions is: “He should have written Nuclear Future instead.” Or even, “I would read Nuclear Future, but not Fossil Future.” Toward the end of our conversation, I asked Epstein to explain why he didn’t write a different book - and why my STEM friends should read the book he actually wrote. Enjoy!
So his answer confirms the hunch you get just from book name "fossil future". He is milquetoast on energy policy. Not future looking at all.
He says "in next 40-50 years" and "fossil fuels "together. This is not future I am interested in
I personally for full nuclear energy+ hydrogen (as more efficient carrier than batteries). In next 10 -15 years. Thats the future.
And it will happen. Because its 2023. We already have alphazero, midjourney and chatgpt, dancing robots , blockchain , starlink and traveling wave reactors. We are living in the future its only that majority of humans are still thinking in the past.
But world will move because its not them who determine it, but 1-5% who live and think in the future. And we have better tools and now AI to help make dreams the reality .
This is why neither.