Your analysis is correct. Renewabale energies share of global energy have only grown by 2% from 2000. Jason Hickels analaysis is that the advanced economies need to reudce emmissions/energy usage by 15% per annum from now Not even possible in a war econcomy.Th other issues are th eneed for a maajor enrgy spike to build transition infrastructure and the limits of resources
My perspective is that the Replacement Theory (Hypothesis) of "energy transition", which deems to simply replace the utility functions of current techno-energy with 'renewables' is factually incorrect. It cannot happen for the reasons you've provided, and several more besides. Energy descent is in our future--whether voluntary or involuntary. To the extent that it is involuntary, it can only result in various kinds of calamity. To the extent that we do it proactively and deliberately we will have some chance of riding the down slope of energy descent with some degree of graceful opportunity.
At the moment, the world's governments are committed to GDP growth at any and all costs. This, to me, means we need to challenge their decision at the grassroots--even below the level of what most of us now imagine to be the domain of politics. See: On Commoning: https://rword.substack.com/p/on-commoning
I recently commented on Canada's public broadcaster, the CBC, that I can no longer listen to it. A friend put this very clearly. On CBC, if it's not neoliberal, it's fringe.
Hello. Neoliberalism is killing us. Including through unnecessary wars as of this past year.
Your analysis is correct. Renewabale energies share of global energy have only grown by 2% from 2000. Jason Hickels analaysis is that the advanced economies need to reudce emmissions/energy usage by 15% per annum from now Not even possible in a war econcomy.Th other issues are th eneed for a maajor enrgy spike to build transition infrastructure and the limits of resources
Thanks Andrew.
My perspective is that the Replacement Theory (Hypothesis) of "energy transition", which deems to simply replace the utility functions of current techno-energy with 'renewables' is factually incorrect. It cannot happen for the reasons you've provided, and several more besides. Energy descent is in our future--whether voluntary or involuntary. To the extent that it is involuntary, it can only result in various kinds of calamity. To the extent that we do it proactively and deliberately we will have some chance of riding the down slope of energy descent with some degree of graceful opportunity.
At the moment, the world's governments are committed to GDP growth at any and all costs. This, to me, means we need to challenge their decision at the grassroots--even below the level of what most of us now imagine to be the domain of politics. See: On Commoning: https://rword.substack.com/p/on-commoning
Thanks for sharing that great quote!
I recently commented on Canada's public broadcaster, the CBC, that I can no longer listen to it. A friend put this very clearly. On CBC, if it's not neoliberal, it's fringe.
Hello. Neoliberalism is killing us. Including through unnecessary wars as of this past year.