Quote:
Originally Posted by sendler
Transportation is 30% of primary energy. Light duty transportation is half of that at 15%. Mostly liquid fossil fuel. Transitioning all light transportation to electric would save 10% of the total primary energy.
.
.
.
.
.
You have done yourself a great disservice in not trying to understand what Hagens (and many others who have this greater understanding of the relationships between energy, population, economy, and psychology) are attempting to teach us. Hagens' lecture is essential for all humans to understand. And his free 1,000 page books will be out for download soon.
.
https://youtu.be/YUSpsT6Oqrg
.
The new movie which Nate co-wrote is out. It's content got quite disjointed from too many collaborators in the kitchen but there is some good information there. Especially the section on embodied energy.
.
Also. For any movie fans, the cinematography and editing and sound design is award winning.
.
Living In The Future's Past
.
https://www.amazon.com/Living-Future...27s+past&psc=1
.
. |
I respectfully disagree with Hagens.
I'm sure that he's held in high esteem within the economics community,but he's no engineer,and I really feel that he qualifies for what Donald Rumsfeld remarked about,as someone who is unaware of unknown unknowns.
Hagen doesn't even know that he doesn't know about things which would impact his projections.
ONLY in the context of as things are,does his argument stand.
If he were more acquainted with US/World History,he'd already be aware that the 'loads' he represents,are not set in stone,and can be severely altered,overnight,with the stroke of a pen.
It would require someone who made more than a C-average grades,perhaps served in a combat theater,actually had an education,and was more willing to serve ,rather than coddle their own fragile ego.
Any carbon combustion that we can do without is a step in the right direction.It's too precious to waste 2/3rds of,every time we use it.