3 ms·
Fair point. He says that the 20% estimate is unlikely to be revised upward, but it's "unlikely because you can't get more than 30% using reasonable approaches t
by robryk 10y ago
Fair point. He says that the 20% estimate is unlikely to be revised upward, but it's "unlikely because you can't get more than 30% using reasonable approaches to PV" and not "unlikely because you can't get more than 30% due to thermodynamics" (I can't find what's _that_ limit quickly).
> MacKay also made the challenge look even bigger than it is by estimating the energy consumption of a "typical moderately-affluent person" and then multiplying that value by the whole population of the UK (...)
Here I'd agree with him: we need to find energy sources that will deal with projected future demands.
- philipkglass 10y agoProjected future demands for energy per capita in the UK and other developed countries grow very slowly, or even decline. Primary energy consumption per capita in the UK has actually declined since 2008 when MacKay wrote his book (you'll need to select countries yourself to see the data): http://www.tsp-data-portal.org/Energy-Consumption-per-Capita#tspQvChart http://www.tsp-data-portal.org/Energy-Consumption-per-Capita... You might think that's just because the UK doesn't do manufacturing any more, but look at manufacturing powerhouses Japan and Germany: they also have seen per-capita declines since 2008. Ecologists and economists alike seem to have a default assumption that human resource consumption is insatiable; they just have different attitudes about that assumption. I don't know how many years of trends like the one I just linked it will take before they reassess resource satiety.