All it takes is adjustments in how we use energy and money

Engineers have developed the roadmap to 100% renewable energy by 2050.  All it takes is a 40% reduction in energy consumption and a few other pipe dreams. From phys.org, Engineers develop state-by-state plan to convert US to 100% clean, renewable energy by 2050

All it takes is an aggressive change in infrastructure ($$$), social and political will power and changes in the way we use energy.  The experts from Stanford and U. C. Berkeley have a 50-state roadmap on just how to do it.  If you click on a number of states you see that the energy use adjustment is about a 40% decrease in energy use.  That is certainly technologically possible in the next 35 years.  It rather flies in the face of historical energy consumption in the U. S., which seems to have been around 340 MMBtu per capita until the 2008 recession.  A 40% reduction drops us below the per capita energy consumption in 1949 (214 MMBtu).  Unless some really magical technology comes about, I’d guess that a large reduction in energy use would have a large negative impact on the economy, unless we intend to engineer a totally different economy.

The solution comes with jobs increases, health savings and over-all lower cost energy and money in your pocket.  The engineers rather ignore the lack of hard data for fossil fuel related health problems and increases in energy costs for those countries pursuing the green agenda.

We do get a nice state-by-state proposal with savings, old fossil energy in black and new 100% renewable in bright, clean colors.  5.7% from solar in Alaska?  Really?

Advertisements

5 responses to “All it takes is adjustments in how we use energy and money

  1. Consider the impact of such a policy on but a single industry: clothing.
    A 40% decrease in energy use will also necessitate an increase in the use of ‘natural’ products in lieu of textiles. Synthetics will go away, and cotton requires a LOT of water and energy, so leather and wool will become necessary replacements. This would distress the animal rights people greatly,
    as well as stressing food supplies. The environmental impact of slaughterhouses, tannerys and sheep ranches would be far more noxious, despite their allegedly smaller ‘carbon footprint’.
    The ‘social and political will power’ is a euphemism for tyranny – the ability to impose your own will on others despite their objections. It’s enough to make you want to stock up on batteries for your lasers.

  2. Let’s first adjust these “consensus science models” to fit reality:

    1. Anthropogenic Climate Warming
    2. The Big Bang Cosmology Model
    3. The Standard Nuclear Model
    4. The Standard Solar Model

    The ongoing AGW scam is only the most recent part of a seventy-year worldwide crime against humanity . . .

    that started in 1945 with a NEWS BLACKOUT of battlefield victories by Stalin’s USSR troops in Manchuria and Korea in AUG-SEPT 1945 . . .

    frightening world leaders into uniting nations [UN] and formerly independent national academies of science [NAS] into an “Orwellian Ministry of Consensus Scientific Truths” on 24 Oct 1945:

    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Introduction.pdf

    I.e., National Academies of Science were united worldwide to “save the world from nuclear annihilation” by betraying public trust and forbidding public knowledge of the powerful force of nuclear energy that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki:

    NEUTRON REPULSION in cores of all atoms heavier than ~150 amu (atomic mass units) including Uranium and Plutonium atoms, the Sun, the Milky Way and the Universe.

  3. Facts are facts.
    Worthless wind turbines and senseless solar account for almost nothing energy production wise, and ruin the landscape.
    SEE GRAPH
    2013 Energy
    Source: http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec7_5.pdf

    Fossil Fuel Total Percentage 39.1%+27.6%=66.7%
    Nuclear and Hydro-Electric Total Percentage 19.5%+6.7%=26.2%
    Total Fossil Fuel, Nuclear, & Hydro-Electric Percentage 66.7%+26.2%=92.9%

  4. Where does the money come from to pay for all those clean energy jobs?
    answer: YOU & ME in higher energy costs.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s