Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 16:02:27 -

Author: ---

Subject: Re: Calculating Conscionable Energy Usage (was radiation)

Post:

We also try to calculate how to reduce our energy use. I set a goal each
year of a 25% reduction through conservation and efficiency done without
unduly lowering the standard of living. Every year the groups doing this
have trouble achieving the goal. Doing the actual numbers is revealing
here. Note that the energy use of large countries is naturally higher than
small countries and that of countries that mine/process/manufacture
internally are considerably higher than those that can live off of other
country's energy use. Point is to look at all of Europe, not just one
nation and look at Canada, Australia, and the U.S.--they have very similar
energy/person figures (Canada is usually highest!)

Not surprisingly, GNP tracks energy use perfectly, and life-expectancy
tracks energy fairly well (averaged over the continents).

Bottom line here though is that the future fate of the environment has
passed out of the hands of the the U.S./Europe and is now in the hands of
China and India. Doing anything that wrecks the economy in the name of
'saving the earth' is futile unless China follows suit.

Rick

Richard W. Tarara
Professor of Physics
Saint Mary's College
Notre Dame, Indiana

*******************************************
Free Physics Instructional Software
www.saintmarys.edu/~rtarara/software.html
Updates and new multi-resolutions versions now available.
********************************************

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Bill Norwood"
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2012 1:34 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [tap-l] Calculating Conscionable Energy Usage (was radiation)

> But we are spending the Earth.
>
> What I am urging is arriving at a number, based on existing technologies,
> that will guide us individually and industrially toward a conscionable and
> long-term sustainable energy-use level.
>
> 1. Perhaps that number would eliminate the usage of air conditioning, for
> example.
> 2. Perhaps that number would have us walking, biking, recreating, working
> etc closer to home.
>
> Just as we found thousands of ways to use electricity and other energy we
> can find thousands of ways to reduce that usage, post-mistake.
>
> We have already shown that we are not smart enough technology-wise to keep
> up with artificially created demand for energy.
>
> Then after, yes, A F T E R we have robust and sustainable technology,
> THEN we could cautiously increase our energy usage.
>
> Bill Norwood, U of MD at College Park
>
>

Back