It seems to me like the TLDR of the article is 1. Energy use per capita cannot grow indefintely. - Agreed 2. The economy cannot grow without energy growth - D

It seems to me like the TLDR of the article is 1. Energy use per capita cannot grow indefintely. - Agreed 2. The economy cannot grow without energy growth - Disagree (see chart in [0] shows that energy use per capita peaked in the 1970s and we most certainly have had growth since then) 3. Our current economic system is based on growth and would collapse if we didn't have growth. - Disagree (he just kind makes this assumption and doesn't go into details) 4. We should transition to a steady state economy - Disagree (Why should we stop growing now to avoid the potential problemof not growing in the future.) [0] - http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2013/04/10/176801719/two-centuries-of-energy-in-america-in-four-graphs http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2013/04/10/176801719/two-c...