Yeah the second half is really weird. It seems to suddenly take the proposition "more energy is good" and conclude that "energy inefficiency is good" follows. B

Yeah the second half is really weird. It seems to suddenly take the proposition "more energy is good" and conclude that "energy inefficiency is good" follows. Both energy abundance and efficiency are good; efficiency is a multiplier of the positive effects of increased abundance. The detachment of energy use per capita from gdp per capita after the 70s is a good thing. That gap is pure upside, where each unit increase of energy is strictly more valuable than it would otherwise have been. In general, I find this false dichotomy between efficiency and abundance so maddening. Why not both??